honge_kamyaab
11-16 09:11 AM
Power of internet, thanks for all the input.
That is right my previous I-94 has expired and I should get the latest I-94 as part of new I-797. My US multiple visa expired last August.
My question is thoroughly answered that I could use the "Automatic revalidation rule" to come back into US using my I-94 and I-797.
One more question to the folks who became Canadian PRs. When I exit out
of US can they force me to give up I-94 as I am landing as Canadian PR. In others words,
can they override "Automatic revalidation rule" in this case.
Part of me says they are two different teams one working for US to track I-94
and the other looking for Canadian PR so they can never rationalize this. If they talk then that could be an issue. Isn't that right?
That is right my previous I-94 has expired and I should get the latest I-94 as part of new I-797. My US multiple visa expired last August.
My question is thoroughly answered that I could use the "Automatic revalidation rule" to come back into US using my I-94 and I-797.
One more question to the folks who became Canadian PRs. When I exit out
of US can they force me to give up I-94 as I am landing as Canadian PR. In others words,
can they override "Automatic revalidation rule" in this case.
Part of me says they are two different teams one working for US to track I-94
and the other looking for Canadian PR so they can never rationalize this. If they talk then that could be an issue. Isn't that right?
wallpaper Tongue Web Piercing Infection
chandrajp
06-25 09:38 AM
As we all know that priority dates became current in the latest visa bulletin. My lawyer made all my paper work ready and is about to file my paperwork with USCIS today. I am not sure if we can file the application a week before it actually becomes current.
I heard some people say that it's actually allowed to file 3 or 4 days before it becomes current. I also read reports that some people's application was rejected because it was sent too early. I am not sure what to believe here. Does anybody has any information on this?
I read in Sheila Murthy web site that she herself knows a case wherein the applicant sent the I485 application just a day before and his/her application got rejected and was penalized in such a way that his application was accepted only a year later.
I heard some people say that it's actually allowed to file 3 or 4 days before it becomes current. I also read reports that some people's application was rejected because it was sent too early. I am not sure what to believe here. Does anybody has any information on this?
I read in Sheila Murthy web site that she herself knows a case wherein the applicant sent the I485 application just a day before and his/her application got rejected and was penalized in such a way that his application was accepted only a year later.
ruchigup
08-22 03:56 PM
Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy, LLP - San Francisco - just Google them....you should be able to find contact information. They've treated me wonderfully!!
"Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen and Loewy, LLP" are doing my H1-B transfer and I had a good experience dealing with them so far (though brief).
Only thing is for GC I am little reluctant due to their PERM cases being the traget of audit
"Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen and Loewy, LLP" are doing my H1-B transfer and I had a good experience dealing with them so far (though brief).
Only thing is for GC I am little reluctant due to their PERM cases being the traget of audit
2011 nose piercing infection.
thomachan72
06-25 03:29 PM
It is a fact that cheap, illegal labor is destroying America and the lifestyle. No doubt about that. What do they think? American's did not do farming before? If you pay enough, any American will do the job.
It's the same process when a new fast food restaurant opens. Initially, all the workers are paid well and the restaurant does great....then come the cheaper labor cost hispanics, salaries fall, quality falls. Why doesn't Stephen Colbert replace his staff with illegal aliens?
Why do you think a franchise like Starbucks is doing sooo well even with very high prices for their products? They do not employ illegal aliens like most fast food and even well known restaurants do - and they pay very well. American's will work there. Same applies to farms or any other place of work.
This excuse will not work.
Congrads brother. You have posted one of the "most ridiculous and hillarious" posts ever!! Comparing Starbucks to picking strawberries??? Wow! why not compare strawberry picking to hollywood acting? Why is hollywood not employing ilegal aliens even when reportedly they need millions to produce a single movie? Tough questions eh?? or does it seem ilogical and crazy reasoning??
If you "pay enough" to the laborer, then who will pay for the produce at the walmart?? and how much is "pay enough" as per the current expectations?
It's the same process when a new fast food restaurant opens. Initially, all the workers are paid well and the restaurant does great....then come the cheaper labor cost hispanics, salaries fall, quality falls. Why doesn't Stephen Colbert replace his staff with illegal aliens?
Why do you think a franchise like Starbucks is doing sooo well even with very high prices for their products? They do not employ illegal aliens like most fast food and even well known restaurants do - and they pay very well. American's will work there. Same applies to farms or any other place of work.
This excuse will not work.
Congrads brother. You have posted one of the "most ridiculous and hillarious" posts ever!! Comparing Starbucks to picking strawberries??? Wow! why not compare strawberry picking to hollywood acting? Why is hollywood not employing ilegal aliens even when reportedly they need millions to produce a single movie? Tough questions eh?? or does it seem ilogical and crazy reasoning??
If you "pay enough" to the laborer, then who will pay for the produce at the walmart?? and how much is "pay enough" as per the current expectations?
more...
fromnaija
11-09 01:54 PM
Done!
I would have love to see a section to show that we are law-abiding and the contribution of our family to our community and the economy. For instance my son has graduated college and now working, paying taxes and contributing to the US economy. And I am sure that most of you here who have college age kids are sending them to colleges and sometimes even paying out-of-state tuition to boot.
I would have love to see a section to show that we are law-abiding and the contribution of our family to our community and the economy. For instance my son has graduated college and now working, paying taxes and contributing to the US economy. And I am sure that most of you here who have college age kids are sending them to colleges and sometimes even paying out-of-state tuition to boot.
zephyrr
12-02 10:15 PM
From another thread on IV, I've read that you should keep a copy of
you approved 140 as proof that your 140 was approved. You should
definitely check with a lawyer before making a move. It is true that
you can get a 3 yr H1B extension based on your old 140. If the old
140 is revoked, according to the law, you are not allowed to get an
extension based on it - however, a memorandum issued by USCIS
says that you can. It would be best to get a 3 yr extension before you switch.
but employer keeps the LC and I-140. If I move to new employer
what is the proof that my I-140 was approved.
Thanks
you approved 140 as proof that your 140 was approved. You should
definitely check with a lawyer before making a move. It is true that
you can get a 3 yr H1B extension based on your old 140. If the old
140 is revoked, according to the law, you are not allowed to get an
extension based on it - however, a memorandum issued by USCIS
says that you can. It would be best to get a 3 yr extension before you switch.
but employer keeps the LC and I-140. If I move to new employer
what is the proof that my I-140 was approved.
Thanks
more...
Green06
08-24 10:48 AM
Vivek Wadhwa spoke very nicely and hit right at the core of the EB Immigration issues and backlog. I talked to him along with my wife and told our story. I also told that lot of people like me will be opting Canada or Australia or even go back to India if the EB Immigration issues are not fixed. If US doesn't fix its Immigration Policies for Skilled Immigrants then they go back to their home countries or other contries who know their worth. This is our most productive age and we won't waste it.
I will try finding the recording of the show and post it here.
I will try finding the recording of the show and post it here.
2010 out any piercing infection
gc_chahiye
08-05 10:58 PM
this number has been thrown around a lot
per uscis as of July 27 they had 75K pieces of mail
so maybe 125K applications including families.
this will increase a bit, so let's say 175K or 200K
still quite different from 700K
per that visa bulletin preediction mail from Jan Pedersons lawfirm USCIS recevied 75k applications within 2 days of July. NOT by July 27th. Anyway will need to wait for USCIS stats to see how many they get by Aug 17th, but looking at how most lawfirms are still very busy with 485 filing I would expect a number midway between 200K and 700K (atleast!)
per uscis as of July 27 they had 75K pieces of mail
so maybe 125K applications including families.
this will increase a bit, so let's say 175K or 200K
still quite different from 700K
per that visa bulletin preediction mail from Jan Pedersons lawfirm USCIS recevied 75k applications within 2 days of July. NOT by July 27th. Anyway will need to wait for USCIS stats to see how many they get by Aug 17th, but looking at how most lawfirms are still very busy with 485 filing I would expect a number midway between 200K and 700K (atleast!)
more...
xu1
08-24 07:40 PM
Here's a link to a presentation that IV prepared in May for lawmakers. Page 13 has visa availabilities for indians in FY05. Take a look.. The slides has made a strong case with lots of facts compiled together. You can present the slides to your lawmakers or their staff, or the media if you get a chance..
http://immigrationvoice.org/media/ImmigrationVoice_Background_for_Media.pdf
Page 13:
soft quota---- ---- india actual approval---- spill over from ROW
2,803 ---- ---- ---- 6,336 ---- ---- ---- 3,533
2,803 ---- ---- ---- 16,687 ---- ---- ---- 13,884
2,803 ---- ---- ---- 23,399 ---- ---- ---- 20,596
Total
8,408 ---- ---- ---- 46,422 ---- ---- ---- 38,014
http://immigrationvoice.org/media/ImmigrationVoice_Background_for_Media.pdf
Page 13:
soft quota---- ---- india actual approval---- spill over from ROW
2,803 ---- ---- ---- 6,336 ---- ---- ---- 3,533
2,803 ---- ---- ---- 16,687 ---- ---- ---- 13,884
2,803 ---- ---- ---- 23,399 ---- ---- ---- 20,596
Total
8,408 ---- ---- ---- 46,422 ---- ---- ---- 38,014
hair Belly Piercing infection!
eastindia
04-22 09:28 AM
So basically you are saying you cannot sue the people responsible for greencard problem.
I think the only option left is to either sue God or sue yourself for your bad luck.
I think the only option left is to either sue God or sue yourself for your bad luck.
more...
Green06
08-24 12:41 PM
He covered mostly which is on this link.
http://www.wral.com/business/local_tech_wire/opinion/blogpost/1672370/
http://www.wral.com/business/local_tech_wire/opinion/blogpost/1672370/
hot Infection Ear Piercing Learn
ajay
04-05 09:54 AM
I found this in another website:
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=685c8d8b3b760210VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=4f719c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
"Since the beginning of this fiscal year (October 2008), USCIS has adjudicated over 75,000 employer petitions, reducing the pending caseload of petitions to under 55,000.USCIS� goal is to have adjudicated all the older employer petitions, and to be processing newer petitions within 4 months, by the end of September 2009"
The last updated date is 04/02/2009. Seems like they have updated something quite recently!!!
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=685c8d8b3b760210VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=4f719c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
"Since the beginning of this fiscal year (October 2008), USCIS has adjudicated over 75,000 employer petitions, reducing the pending caseload of petitions to under 55,000.USCIS� goal is to have adjudicated all the older employer petitions, and to be processing newer petitions within 4 months, by the end of September 2009"
The last updated date is 04/02/2009. Seems like they have updated something quite recently!!!
more...
house What is oral piercing?
sapota
03-17 03:02 PM
That is so not true. Even though Dallas was faster than Philly, it only cleared labor for 2003 and earlier filers in 2005. Essentially Dallas mostly cleared only those cases in 2005 which were stuck at regional and not state level. My labor was cleared in late 2006.
I know cos I am one such unfortunate case.
I know cos I am one such unfortunate case.
tattoo piercing infection
trueguy
12-11 01:43 AM
In a testimony to the House Judiciary Committee back in Apr/May 08, the USCIS clearly stated that it had changed its policy regarding which applications would be adjudicated first.
As I remember, USCIS stated that it was now following a policy where cases that had a possibility of getting a visa number in the near future were adjudicated first. It said that this change in policy was made in order to reduce waste of immigrant visas.
The problem with this approach is that:
- It is not FIFO
- EB2-I/C and EB3 not only continue to remain retrogressed, but retrogression worsens.
Here is how:
Since EB2-I/EB3-I categories are already retrogressed, the I-485 applications in this category will be shelved until it appears that a visa number may become available in the foreseeable future.
So, USCIS puts most of these cases in cold storage while it adjudicates and approves the EB2ROW applications as it receives them on a continuous basis.
When time comes to roll over excess EB2 ROW numbers, two things happen:
- Already substantial use of EB2ROW numbers make few numbers available for roll over
- Limited adjudication of Eb2-I/C and EB3 cases make a very small pool of pre-adjudicated applications. USCIS requests DOS to move dates so that it has access to a larger pool for cherry picking.
The result is that VB dates move forward by leaps and bounds and cases are approved haphazardly with PDs all over the map. When the excess numbers are used up, the dates for EB2-I/C and EB3 retrogress back to previous cutoff dates because there are still a lot of old cases that have not even been brought out of cold storage. The EB2ROW dates are again current because USCIS has adjudicated and approved EB2ROW cases throughout the year- so no backlog there.
If USCIS followed FIFO, then the following would happen:
- USCIS would be adjudicating old EB2I/C and EB3 cases right now, and not the recently received EB2ROW cases.
- This would reduce the number of pre-adjudicated EB2ROW cases and hence lower the demand in the EB2ROW category.
- When time would come to roll over numbers not used by EB2ROW:
- A large pool number of excess visas would be available
- A large pool of pre-adjudicated EB2-I/C and EB3 cases with old PDs would be available that could be readily assigned visa numbers.
As a result, old cases would be assigned visa numbers and backlog would be reduced.
Unfortunately, USCIS has confused its process of adjudicating cases (which is FIFO) with its effort to enforce the country quota. The country limits come into picture only when cases ready for adjudication are to be assigned visa numbers. The process of adjudication should still be FIFO, and not determined by the country quota.
Very good points. I can't agree with you any more.
The question is how do we raise it as an issue so USCIS follow FIFO.
As I remember, USCIS stated that it was now following a policy where cases that had a possibility of getting a visa number in the near future were adjudicated first. It said that this change in policy was made in order to reduce waste of immigrant visas.
The problem with this approach is that:
- It is not FIFO
- EB2-I/C and EB3 not only continue to remain retrogressed, but retrogression worsens.
Here is how:
Since EB2-I/EB3-I categories are already retrogressed, the I-485 applications in this category will be shelved until it appears that a visa number may become available in the foreseeable future.
So, USCIS puts most of these cases in cold storage while it adjudicates and approves the EB2ROW applications as it receives them on a continuous basis.
When time comes to roll over excess EB2 ROW numbers, two things happen:
- Already substantial use of EB2ROW numbers make few numbers available for roll over
- Limited adjudication of Eb2-I/C and EB3 cases make a very small pool of pre-adjudicated applications. USCIS requests DOS to move dates so that it has access to a larger pool for cherry picking.
The result is that VB dates move forward by leaps and bounds and cases are approved haphazardly with PDs all over the map. When the excess numbers are used up, the dates for EB2-I/C and EB3 retrogress back to previous cutoff dates because there are still a lot of old cases that have not even been brought out of cold storage. The EB2ROW dates are again current because USCIS has adjudicated and approved EB2ROW cases throughout the year- so no backlog there.
If USCIS followed FIFO, then the following would happen:
- USCIS would be adjudicating old EB2I/C and EB3 cases right now, and not the recently received EB2ROW cases.
- This would reduce the number of pre-adjudicated EB2ROW cases and hence lower the demand in the EB2ROW category.
- When time would come to roll over numbers not used by EB2ROW:
- A large pool number of excess visas would be available
- A large pool of pre-adjudicated EB2-I/C and EB3 cases with old PDs would be available that could be readily assigned visa numbers.
As a result, old cases would be assigned visa numbers and backlog would be reduced.
Unfortunately, USCIS has confused its process of adjudicating cases (which is FIFO) with its effort to enforce the country quota. The country limits come into picture only when cases ready for adjudication are to be assigned visa numbers. The process of adjudication should still be FIFO, and not determined by the country quota.
Very good points. I can't agree with you any more.
The question is how do we raise it as an issue so USCIS follow FIFO.
more...
pictures ear piercing infection lump
yabadaba
07-21 08:52 AM
This idea was floated a few years back, but then we did not have the win of a flower campaign behind us.
We now have a senator to focus our energies on - Dick Durbin.
How about everybody with a US degree send a copy of the diploma in a packet to Sen Durbin with a message - Dont hold us hostage because of a few bad apples..something to that nature?
Alternatively we can send it to Sen Obama asking him to please let the senior senator from illinois, sen Durbin, know we are high skilled immigrants - dont hold us hostage because of a few bad apples.
maybe we can send an apple too :D
sending to sen obama will make sure the issue is played in media because of the presidential coverage.
We now have a senator to focus our energies on - Dick Durbin.
How about everybody with a US degree send a copy of the diploma in a packet to Sen Durbin with a message - Dont hold us hostage because of a few bad apples..something to that nature?
Alternatively we can send it to Sen Obama asking him to please let the senior senator from illinois, sen Durbin, know we are high skilled immigrants - dont hold us hostage because of a few bad apples.
maybe we can send an apple too :D
sending to sen obama will make sure the issue is played in media because of the presidential coverage.
dresses Nowadays, body piercing has
PD_Dec2002
07-13 03:27 PM
Hi:
Why and how do members get those green and red squares when they post messages? I do know red squares are bad since a mouseover shows the text that the member has had some bad behavior. However, I have seen various texts for green squares. Mine says "I'm on a distinguised road"...I had no idea I was on one, but I sure do hope it ends with a Green Card in hand! :)
Anyway, does anyone know all the different variations of text for green and red squares and how do they change for different members?
Thanks,
Jayant
Why and how do members get those green and red squares when they post messages? I do know red squares are bad since a mouseover shows the text that the member has had some bad behavior. However, I have seen various texts for green squares. Mine says "I'm on a distinguised road"...I had no idea I was on one, but I sure do hope it ends with a Green Card in hand! :)
Anyway, does anyone know all the different variations of text for green and red squares and how do they change for different members?
Thanks,
Jayant
more...
makeup makeup male ear piercing. ear
vik352
12-08 03:19 PM
Thanks ashkam. I am still on H1, this is exactly what I needed to hear. I will confirm this with my attorney too. Thanks again!
According to my attorney, if you are in valid H1 status, your wife can get her H4 stamped, reenter on an H4 and still maintain her GC application. Once she comes back, she can go back to work on her EAD and transition into I-485 pending status.
According to my attorney, if you are in valid H1 status, your wife can get her H4 stamped, reenter on an H4 and still maintain her GC application. Once she comes back, she can go back to work on her EAD and transition into I-485 pending status.
girlfriend body piercing infection
LostInGCProcess
08-25 12:33 PM
>> even if she gets a 221(g) at the consulate can she return to US with the AP she has?
Yes. But she may need to use EAD in that case. Please check with your lawyer.
_________________
Not a legal advise.
Okay!! I'll have to ask a lawyer then...But most often I get good answers here in the IV forum, then asking the attorney...sometimes, i personally feel, they are not all that good with answers.
Yes. But she may need to use EAD in that case. Please check with your lawyer.
_________________
Not a legal advise.
Okay!! I'll have to ask a lawyer then...But most often I get good answers here in the IV forum, then asking the attorney...sometimes, i personally feel, they are not all that good with answers.
hairstyles Tongue Piercing
eb3_nepa
09-21 11:56 PM
Call Harrisburg. They will be able to "expedite" the request.
lazycis
05-07 01:22 PM
from AC21 memo issued on December 27, 2005
Question 14. Must the alien have a new offer of employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the I-140 portability provisions?
Answer: Yes. The alien cannot still be looking for “same or similar” employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the adjustment portability provisions. The alien must be able to show there is a new valid offer of employment at the time the I-485 is adjudicated.
So find a new job before I-485 is approved.
Question 14. Must the alien have a new offer of employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the I-140 portability provisions?
Answer: Yes. The alien cannot still be looking for “same or similar” employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the adjustment portability provisions. The alien must be able to show there is a new valid offer of employment at the time the I-485 is adjudicated.
So find a new job before I-485 is approved.
dontcareaboutGC
03-19 11:24 AM
Ignore this if this is a repost!
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
No comments:
Post a Comment