Printable View
I'm not an Immigration expert but I think for AOS they look whether or not applicant maintained valid status since last US entry. Prior violations may be ignored.
Please check with a good immigration attorney!
Thanks!
Quote:
Originally Posted by cm9201
My PD is Oct-23-2009, EB2 NIW, CN. Do I have a chance to become current before Spring 2013? Thank you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cm9201
http://www.immigration-information.c...lly-work-9988/
As per Ron,
Re: 245K rule: Does it really work?
I think you intended to write "before your last admission." Section 245(k) excuses all status violations for employment based adjustment applicants if the status violations occurred prior the applicant's last lawful entry into the United States. This is an absolute rule and is not subject to the exercise of discretion on the part of the adjudicator.
I remember this case on Murthy.com ( probably this is yours as i see all scenarios are same ). Look like this is complicated case, even though your wife went to India and got h4 approved ( on h4 legality), i still believe its complicated case and definetly you should stick to high profile lawyer.
My sincere advise is do not take opinions from these forums for your case as no one is really immigration expert (even though they have theoritical knowledge)
Quote:
Originally Posted by cm9201
Gurus, quick questions, in I-693 form:
1) A#, do i need to write A followed by 9 digit number or just 9 digit number
2) If we do not have middle name, just need to leave it blank or type N/A
3) If no SSN then need to leave blank or N/A or ITIN
Nishant Bhai,Quote:
Originally Posted by nishant2200
Thanks for the detail doc.. I hope this will help a lot of people with little queries.. I have one too.. I had posted a few days ago- I have been in the US for about 6 years now on H1. Never went back to India due various reasons one of which is the obvious hassle of stamping and with my parents travelling here frequently. My spouse came on H4 and 3 years later moved to H1.. has been working ever since and like me never went back to India. So pratically both our visas are expired on the passport but have valid H1's and my I-140. I became current in Dec bulletin and hoping to apply on Dec 1st. If we decide to plan a trip in March/ April timeframe, due you see any issue here? I've emailed my lawyer but he states "Let's get the EAD/ AP first and we will cross the bridge when we get there".
I am really looking to get some advice here or general sense if we will have to face any issues if we decide to travel using EAD/ AP. I haven't left the country in the last 6 years and this gives me nightmares thinking I will jeopardise everything for not getting my stampings. Please advice
If that was the case any violator will leave the country once and get back in clean. I don't think it's true. They look for all previous 'stays'. I think ignoring/not-ignoring a violation is at the discretion of the particular consular officer.
Wasn't Obama's aunt in news last year for a similar situation? May be I'm remembering the case incorrectly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mygctracker
(1)I have had 'A' followed by number, just as CIS allocated the number for me
(2) leave it blank.
(3) leave blank.
Quote:
Originally Posted by venkimakthal
Jan 2008,Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan2008
I missed this question last time you posted. Sorry about that.
By ' travel using EAD/ AP' you mean trying to come back using AP- I assume. Technically it should not be a problem as your case seems pretty straight forward from what you have described here. Also if you attempt H1 stamping then also technically it should not be peoblem depending upon specifics of the case(now this a has big luck factor too..I am sure you know that :). Thats where I suggested you to attempt H1 first and keep AP as backup.
As your lawyer said you can discuss your options with him when you get EAD /AP.
HTH
More details at Murthy's in connection with 245(k) clause
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_sugemp.html
Most recent USCIS memorandum added to Ajdudicators manual http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memo...k)_14jul08.pdf
cm9201 , I think you are good after reading this from the above memo
Counting against the 180 days timeframe in (d)(1).(
A) General Guidelines. If the adjudicator determines that an employment-based adjustment of status applicant described in (d)(2) above is subject to any of the bars to adjustment of status set forth in Sections 245(c)(2), (c)(7), or (c)(8), then the adjudicator must determine whether the aggregate period in which the alien failed to continuously maintain lawful status, worked without authorization, or otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien’s admission since the date of alien’s last lawful admission to the United States is 180 days or less.
The guidance below describes the periods of time to be examined for purposes of calculating time against the 180-day period.
• The adjudicator must only examine the period from the date of the alien’s last lawful admission to the United States and must not count violations that occurred before the alien’s last lawful admission.
Note: Please consult an immigration attorney and dont take this as a legal advice
Thanks for the doc Nishanth.
Do you know if the '60' days wait time is in series or in parallel for each of the agency, before adjudicating the file?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nishant2200
Thank you LeoQuote:
Originally Posted by leo07
'Since last visit' is strange clause, I think only in case of employer cancelling H1 and informing CIS it will trigger the out of status stuff, and even if you are out of status for small period and your new h1 has I94 with it then you are good
if your status was an issue, the new h1 will be issued without I94 and one need to leave the country and reenter (they can use visa if it's still valid and stamped based on previous h1, otherwise stamping is required)
reason why attorney asked to get H4 stamped and enter, so that your clock starts ticking again. the 180 days is after your last successful entry into US. I believe, although things like this best talked with lawyer.Quote:
Originally Posted by cm9201
edit: Noticed that Kanmani already put this in exact legal verbiage and clause above. thank you ma'm. credit to her. I still say one should take a 30 minute consultation with lawyer and sort this out for good. everyones case specifics are different. lawyer is best judge.
I can't make it out from this doc, but has to be parallel. it would be totally stupid if its series.Quote:
Originally Posted by leo07
Thanks Kanmami, Nishant2210, this is helpful information. I took appointment with Murthy law firm and discussed this in 2010, she said once H4 stamped and re-entered US then 485 may not be issue and need not to worry. before I file 485 I will talk to them again.
Thanks for your advise.
Obama aunt was staying in country illegal not out of status. there is clear difference in out of status and illegal stay.
Hello Everyone,
I have been following this blog for more than 4-5 Months, and needless to say, it has the best info and enlightened me with very useful information. Thanks to everyone for sharing their info and I hope I will be active too as some of them out here. Kudos! Keep up the good work!!!
:D
PD - 03/25/2009
Any Nov 2011 filers who got hard copy of receipt or biometrics appointment letter?
PD: 10Oct2011
AOS package sent: 4Nov2011 to NSC
Receipt: Did not get it yet
I have a request to all regular members of the forum. When you encounter a non-prediction/calculation related question that is not urgent/emergency on this thread, please reply asking to post in the Q&A Sub-Forum which is created specifically for these questions. Any answers that you wish to post, please post in the Q&A Sub-Forum only.
I know the traffic is on this thread hence the appeal of this thread. If there is an emergency or urgent question - then we should surely rally around and discuss solutions right here in interest of time. However, questions like - anybody got receipt yet?, what do I do for birth certificate, is there a good civil surgeon in Alaska, what is EVL, etc etc - should not discussed in this thread and the person asking the question should be politely directed to the appropriate sub-forum..
Well said & I agree with you. I will move my question to Q&A section. Sorry for being a pain.Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng
In an attempt to understand DoS MO, I was looking at old PD movements and I found one strange EB2I movement. After the 07/07 fiasco, EB2I PD was retrogressed to pre-fiasco level of Apr-04 - which makes sense. However, in Aug/Sept 2008, PD moved to June-06 and Aug-06, it quickly then regressed back to Apr-03 in Oct-2008. We did not Aug-06 level again until June-2011! I was not actively following this then to have no idea what happened.
Was it the usual case of DoS advancing dates to move CP cases so as to avoid visa number wasted? If it happened in 2008, could it happen again??
Link for the data: http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentIndia.pdf
same here.Quote:
Originally Posted by MANTRAM
PD - Oct 30, 2007
AOS filed - Nov 3, 2011. Sent to Phoenix LockBox
Receipt: Not yet.
However, one of my colleague who filed a day before got his receipt on nov 11. Weird!
I saw this at niunational.com and pasted based on Chrome's translation.
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Oppenheim, Charlie W wrote:
As you mentioned the demand based on the 2007 filings has been acted
upon. In the past I had that demand which could be acted upon once it
was determined that there would be "otherwise unused" numbers, and
approximately how many. Now I am must generate new filings based on
the rapid forward movement of the cut-off dates. Once that demand
begins to be reported it will result in the cut-off date slowing,
stopping, retrogressing, or becoming unavailable. So there is likely
to be much more fluctuation than has been experienced in recent years,
when although they were not the moves as early as some would have liked,
at least there was not the significantly increased risk of volatility.
-----Original Message-----
From: contact@niunational.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 10:30 PM
To: Oppenheim, Charlie W
Subject: Questions regarding the Demand Data from New Immigrants United
(NIU)
Dear Mr. Oppenheim,
Thank you for your last reply.
As the December bulletin came up, we saw another promising leap with
regard to all categories. Thank you and your team, as always, for
your industrial work!
We also noticed that the recent Demand Data used in the determination
of the December bulletin
(http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/Empl...utOffDates.pdf)
indicates the Demand prior to January 1, 2008 to be 25 for China.
However, many of our members who have missed the boat during July 2007
have recently submitted I-485 Forms and received Fingerprint Notices.
They are more than 25 and thus obviously were not calculated towards
the Demand Data. We all know that there are certain post-I-485 phases
(e.g., Receipt Notice, Fingerprint Notice, Name Check Clear, EAD/AP
Approval and Final Approval), so exactly which phase is considered in
calculating the Demand Data?
Moreover, would you be able to share with us how the cut-off date
would move forward in the second quarter of FY-2012? Is it going to
be as promising as the first quarter goes, or else? Thank you.
Sincerely Yours,
Executive Team,
New Immigrants United
This is based on what I read on forums, I became active only in Sep 2009. The dates were moved to 2006 in 2008 as a knee jerk reaction to desperately grab preadjudicated EB2 I/C cases after the spillover rule changes in 2007. Thanks to this around 10% of the folks in 2005 and 2006 got approved but people as far back in 2003 were waiting. Most of the approvals came from TSC, basically they approved cases where things like name check etc were cleared, in those days things were neither automated or organized the way they are today. Now despite this desperate reaction enough EB2 I/C cases could not be found and 6K of spillover still went to EB3 ROW. This is one of the reasons why they should play it safe with a larger buffer so that law is followed in the true spirit. Basically in 2009 things became streamlined and EB2 I/C finally reached into early 2005 most of it was in the Sep 2009 VB i.e. 1 Year of movement that is when the clinical approvals of being current and being approved in the same month started. Then next year we reached May 2006 and then next year to APR 15 2007 and finally a new chapter of intake is being written. Iam sure if those 6K numbers were given to EB2 I/C back in 2008 this intake would have happened a little earlier itself as the numbers would have reached a very close point at the end of FY 2011. Another example of injustice though smaller in terms of numbers but probably worse is that EB3 I/C did not get their regular quota for a few years you can imagine how bad it would be to get 500 out of 2800 visas less in a year. The Chinese folks filed a lawsuit to have this corrected, probably it is due to their efforts that things are better now and allocations are finally being done correctly. The Eb3 incident happened because EB3 M & P gobbled up far more numbers that they were supposed to get and Eb3 had to be set to U because the annual cap was consumed.Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng
Thanks asankaran. My takes:
1. People have direct email access to CO! Wow!! Chinese have much better network with DoS than Indians.
2. Cut-off date slowing, stopping, retrogressing, or becoming unavailable: Everything is on the table. Depends upon how much demand shows up.
3. Since not much additional documentarily qualified demand is going to show up before the next bulletin, we should expect further movement (unless USCIS provides DoS with data on how many new 485s they are receiving - I doubt that)
Quote:
Originally Posted by asankaran
Also in 2008,2009 and 2010 the demand seems to be really low.
Looked up this data from http://flcdatacenter.com/CasePerm.aspx
Country PDyear casestatus PermCount
CHINA 2008 CERTIFIED 1210
CHINA 2008 CERTIFIED-EXPIRED 2118
CHINA 2008 DENIED 353
CHINA 2008 WITHDRAWN 106
CHINA 2009 Certified 1090
CHINA 2009 Certified-Expired 1022
CHINA 2009 Denied 199
CHINA 2009 Withdrawn 205
CHINA 2010 Certified 1778
CHINA 2010 Certified-Expired 2274
CHINA 2010 Denied 338
CHINA 2010 Withdrawn 168
INDIA 2008 CERTIFIED 7198
INDIA 2008 CERTIFIED-EXPIRED 9371
INDIA 2008 DENIED 1676
INDIA 2008 WITHDRAWN 593
INDIA 2009 Certified 6403
INDIA 2009 Certified-Expired 4984
INDIA 2009 Denied 971
INDIA 2009 Withdrawn 1174
INDIA 2010 Certified 14872
INDIA 2010 Certified-Expired 14058
INDIA 2010 Denied 1981
INDIA 2010 Withdrawn 1085
So all together there are 15K Perms approved in for PD in 2008. 13.5K in 2009 and 28K in 2010 for IC. Total of 56K. With 60% Eb2:EB3 ratio = 34K.
So technically with one 30K Spillover, we should be becoming current in a year or so. Whats wrong with this picture?
Assuming:
1. No Demand destruction.
2. All 2007 cases are allocated visas by end of FY 2012.
3. Eb2:EB3 ratio of 60:40, like others were using.
Side note: Adding a snapshot of rest of world: Certified-Widthdrawn and Certified respectively.
2008: 16626;12684
2009: 7455;8584
2010: 21248;16007
Altogether: 82604(Eb2:50K;EB3:32K). This kind of EB2 inflow shouldn't be able to fill up 140K visas....
What am i Missing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng
Found a DoS report on LPR (Green Card) population in US. Interesting read: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/s...pr_fr_2010.pdf
Some quick points:
1. US admitted around 1.1 million LPR every year in the period 2008 - 2010.
2. Biggest chunk: around 0.5M were non restricted family based (immediate family of citizens)
3. Capped Categories: ~215K FB, ~150K EB per year, Diversity ~50K per year
4. The Category "Refugees and Asylees" got more green cards than EB category in past three years ~150K per year!
Country-wise visa allocation (all categories combined) in past three years:
Country.....2010.....2009.....2008
Mexico......139K.....165K.....190K
China........71K......64K......80K
India........69K......57K......63K
Spec has done a lot of work on PERM data and his results are summarized here: http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showth...d-Calculations
You would note there that while 2009 is indeed light, 2008 is almost as dense as 2007 without considering any demand destruction. Could it be that your numbers are off because you are not considering Certified-Expired.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waiting4Ever
Waiting4Ever - Buddy, I believe you missed to consider the dependents in your numbers. The gurus have been using a ratio of 2.04/perm for the dependents.
Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng
The FY 2008 file corresponds to all the cases approved in FY 2008 and not the priority date of 2008. PD is to be derived from case number. See this link by Spec and Veni
http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showth...d-Calculations
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waiting4Ever
Definitely he is being merciful to EB2IC.
From the email, if one takes very positive interpretation, it seems to me that our thoughts that he is actually going for a count of incoming in early November etc is not happening. He is just doing staggered movements in batches of 3-4 months at a time, and until they actually turn into a qualified demand which he deems is significant enough to overcome his projection of demand he wants, he is going to let it flow in. This does augur very well for folks in March 15th 2008 onwards.
All indications so far then seem to be positive. Right now predictions calculations have taken back seat to CO's gameplan.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
Not opening the actual data into excel, I can point out few things which I feel:
1. EB2:EB3 ratio should be more like 75:25. I have not met single person to date who is in EB3 post july 2007.
2. Dependent factor of 2.25. I think one in four couples would have a non USA born child, and lead to 9 GC applications for 4 primaries. I think you have not multiplied at all by this.
Now suppose your 56k is correct figure, and you go by the axiom that number of PERMs = demand, then 56k demand till 2010 end. Right now 2011 is also going to add, so if 2011 is same as 2010, add 28k for it also, 56 + 28 = 84k demand, so we need 84k visas to make current. Further, it's been say 4.5 years since July 2007. 84k / 4.5 = almost 19k a year. Last two years around 30k SOFAD, so with this assumption of best case 30k SOFAD, the 84k would be gobbled up in say 3 years, but in these 3 years, further 3 * 19 = 57 k would be added, hence not making current.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waiting4Ever
A poster on Teddy's other forum (username: FedUpWithGC) indicated that his PD is July-2008 for CP and he has NOT received fee notice. So we can put to rest the rumors of fee notices beyond June-2008. He was specifically reacting to someone suggesting that fee notices have gone for PDs until Sept-2008.
Seems like the current PD movement is part of a deliberate plan and CO will cover ground at least till the fee notices. So in next couple bulletins we should reach the end of June-2008.
Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng
I don't think we can discount the fact that someone with a Sept PD claimed to get a receipt. I don't know if it's factual or not or maybe the July chap didn't get his due to wrong address or some other issue on their side.
That being said I do agree that it will go through July 1 and then stop or retrogress.
Main issue is OP has gone with a ratio of '1' based on what he would have read on this forum recently. As GhostWriter suggested OP has to calculate number of PERMs based on the receipt number and then ratio '1' can be used. ( and that will cover many factors such as EB2:EB3 ratio, demand destruction etc)Quote:
Originally Posted by nishant2200
PS: As for ratio of 2.25 ...not sure from where assumption of out of 4 families 1 will have non USA born kid came from. May be it was true for previous years but not anymore IMHO. I do not come across many people with India born kids now a days. :)
IMHO 2.05 is quite an optimistic ratio. Refer to the following thread on Trackitt, refer to the post by Aniraj. As Nishant points out its highly likely that 1 in 8 families will have atleast 1 non US born kid. In EB1 especially EB1C the likelihood is even more.Quote:
Originally Posted by suninphx
http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussi...-485-approvals
Posted by aniraj200 (9) 11 hours 25 minutes ago
EB2 India PD 6/26/2007 Got approval email today for myself & all the three dependents.
Have updated my profile
Good luck to all
Now a days ratio of eb2:eb3 is more than 75% ( i too did not see who is eb3 from past couple of years except people who did 3 yrs graduation). And regarding ratio 2.25, i dont think it stands any more, from past 1-2 year we are not seeing any married people coming to usa and applying green card, i definetly believe 2.05 is good for calculations.
One more issue to consider: i believe in 2007/2008 there was new rule for Masters students getting 29 months of OPT, which ever the year that rule was invoked, students did not think about starting h1b until one more year, so i believe there will be increase in people with eb2 category after 2010/2011 but their ratio will be less than 2( as 99% of them does not have kids and they marry their classmates)
Quote:
Originally Posted by suninphx
While the assumption of 1 in 8 family having a non-US-born kid is quite reasonable for EB2, I think there are several factors that cut into the dependency ratio going forward:
1. Indians who come on F1 and transition to H1B and then EB2 will not have any non-US-born kids.
2. Indian professionals are marrying late and having kids late (30s rather than 20s) - and at the same time they are aware of the benefits to the kid if he/she is born in the US. I know of couples who delayed having kids until they were in US.
I don't doubt that 2.25 is probably correct at the moment - however, I think it is in a downward trend with time. BTW - mine is a DINK (Double Income No Kids) household with parallel EB2 filings - so I am doing my best to keep the ratio down :-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
Teddy- I think lets not take 'selective' examples to prove point. If you look at the sheet Kanmani is maintaning you may get a different impression. And another thing is when we are considering a ratio of '1' and are going by density of 2500/month I think we have all these factors avaraged out and covered. So lets go by that.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
PS: 2.05 may not be actual rate for India but 2.25 is too high IMHO. Your own assumption of out of 8 families one having non USA born kid brings ratio to 2.125.