benbear
11-09 09:07 AM
It is safe to say notice date in Sept equal to receipting by USCIS in Sept, because at notice date, USCIS actually open your file then send receipt.
So,from , EB receipt in Sept vs. receipt in Oct = 2:1
150k in Sept. include both EB(100K) and FB (50K).
(Note: assume received FB every month 50K. 50K is a reasonable assumption,
otherwise it's no way for USCIS to approve 800K AOS a year.)
Since EB in Sept vs. Oct is 2:1, so total EB receipting in Oct. should be 50K.
Out of the 655k total, the key is lead time for FB approval, how many month?
This is the key! If we assume average FB approval takes 6 month,
then EB out of the 655k is 655K-50Kx6=355K.
Add the 50K EB in Oct. Total EB backlog is 405K.
Still the key is average FB approval time, any gurus has any idea.
I am sure the time is not 12 month. If it's 12 month,
then EB backlog= 655K-50Kx12+50K=105k. :D:D:D Which is impossible!!
That same link you gave tells us that 655k is pending/back-log for AOS....
So,from , EB receipt in Sept vs. receipt in Oct = 2:1
150k in Sept. include both EB(100K) and FB (50K).
(Note: assume received FB every month 50K. 50K is a reasonable assumption,
otherwise it's no way for USCIS to approve 800K AOS a year.)
Since EB in Sept vs. Oct is 2:1, so total EB receipting in Oct. should be 50K.
Out of the 655k total, the key is lead time for FB approval, how many month?
This is the key! If we assume average FB approval takes 6 month,
then EB out of the 655k is 655K-50Kx6=355K.
Add the 50K EB in Oct. Total EB backlog is 405K.
Still the key is average FB approval time, any gurus has any idea.
I am sure the time is not 12 month. If it's 12 month,
then EB backlog= 655K-50Kx12+50K=105k. :D:D:D Which is impossible!!
That same link you gave tells us that 655k is pending/back-log for AOS....
wallpaper not really is irrelevant.
arunkotte
09-07 12:45 PM
I am in great need of some suggestions. I hold a MS degree in computer science and graduate in 2004 dec. Since then I have been with the same employer.
Now that he is filing for my LC. Is it difficult to get through with MS+0yrs of expereince ?
Also, at this point of time i have found other employers who is willing to do my GC in which case I will have MS+2 yrs of expereince.
Is it worth changing employer for gaining 2 yrs of expereince for my LC.
Does this really make my case more stronger ? or I am just OVER REACTING ? and doing unneccessary thing
DOES THE EXPEREINCE with MS makes it better for EB2 ?
Please let me know if there are some experts out there
It doesn't matter. I had my EB2 approved with MS+0. Just make sure the job description explicitly mentions MS with no further experience.
Now that he is filing for my LC. Is it difficult to get through with MS+0yrs of expereince ?
Also, at this point of time i have found other employers who is willing to do my GC in which case I will have MS+2 yrs of expereince.
Is it worth changing employer for gaining 2 yrs of expereince for my LC.
Does this really make my case more stronger ? or I am just OVER REACTING ? and doing unneccessary thing
DOES THE EXPEREINCE with MS makes it better for EB2 ?
Please let me know if there are some experts out there
It doesn't matter. I had my EB2 approved with MS+0. Just make sure the job description explicitly mentions MS with no further experience.
mlk2009
08-06 07:32 PM
hi,
I came to US 5 years back in H4. My husband processed GC and 140 is cleared and 485 pending. I got my EAD and now working. My husband and I have problems and he is threatening to ruin my life.
Can I know a few things
1. Can he take me out of the GC ?
2. Can he revoke my EAD ?
3. Can my employee extend my EAD which is expiring in 2010 and continue my GC.
please help...
I came to US 5 years back in H4. My husband processed GC and 140 is cleared and 485 pending. I got my EAD and now working. My husband and I have problems and he is threatening to ruin my life.
Can I know a few things
1. Can he take me out of the GC ?
2. Can he revoke my EAD ?
3. Can my employee extend my EAD which is expiring in 2010 and continue my GC.
please help...
2011 My Osama bin Laden Cartoons
leoindiano
07-09 11:55 AM
Upgraded to premium processing on June 19th. No news so far....No update on uscis website whatsoever....
Anybody in same boaT?
Anybody in same boaT?
more...
needhelp!
02-14 02:34 PM
bump
raysaikat
04-21 12:00 PM
I am currently on my 9th year h1..my 140 is approved..and i am not a june 2007 filer..H1 valid till may 2010
My spouse is on H1..can i switch over H4..
> My company had not "officially" laid me off.. i am on an extended LOP.. and since there is no time limit of LOP on H1.. i am sure i cannot be on LOP for ever..;-)..its been 2 weeks..and i dont want to become illegal now..
so here is my dilemma::confused:
a.) If i switch to H4 and after few months i get a project..can i go back to H1..->
Yes. You might need to file a new H1-B petition though (I am not positive on that).
b.) Can i file for H4 on my own..is it complicated?
c.) if i change to H4..and my PD becomes current (PD Dec 2005)
.) Can i file for AOS..as my 140 is approved..
Yes.
.) Suppose i go back to desh ..can i file for consular processing..if my PD become current
Yes. You do need to file an application to change it into CP.
thank you!
Note however that you need to have a job offer to get the GC.
My spouse is on H1..can i switch over H4..
> My company had not "officially" laid me off.. i am on an extended LOP.. and since there is no time limit of LOP on H1.. i am sure i cannot be on LOP for ever..;-)..its been 2 weeks..and i dont want to become illegal now..
so here is my dilemma::confused:
a.) If i switch to H4 and after few months i get a project..can i go back to H1..->
Yes. You might need to file a new H1-B petition though (I am not positive on that).
b.) Can i file for H4 on my own..is it complicated?
c.) if i change to H4..and my PD becomes current (PD Dec 2005)
.) Can i file for AOS..as my 140 is approved..
Yes.
.) Suppose i go back to desh ..can i file for consular processing..if my PD become current
Yes. You do need to file an application to change it into CP.
thank you!
Note however that you need to have a job offer to get the GC.
more...
belmontboy
02-26 05:37 PM
Original LCA salary is like 58k and current one is 40k
40K??? you kidding right?
You probably would earn more if you are working at Walmart. See if you can transfer your H1B to Walmart
40K??? you kidding right?
You probably would earn more if you are working at Walmart. See if you can transfer your H1B to Walmart
2010 against Osama bin Laden
Norristown
04-13 02:12 PM
I was in this situation few years back. I was on bench for 8 months (not paid). I chose not to reply to the DOL letter. I feared that accepting that I was on bench for 8 months will make you out of status.
Every time you go for H1 revalidation, you will be asked were you out of status any time.
Later I have done 3 H1 revalidations (Canada), no problems. If sending reply is not mandatory then keep quiet. Six months later my employer filed for bankruptcy.
Every time you go for H1 revalidation, you will be asked were you out of status any time.
Later I have done 3 H1 revalidations (Canada), no problems. If sending reply is not mandatory then keep quiet. Six months later my employer filed for bankruptcy.
more...
NKR
04-21 03:07 PM
H1b does not exactly make one work "freely" in the US. Certainly not, if the employer is processing your GC as you are pretty much stuck with him.
Only L-1A allows faster GC processing as it does not require Labor and PDs are usually current. L-1B has no such short-cuts and is also plagued by the problem that it is valid only for 5 years. So if you cannot get into a 485 stage within those 5 years, then you are in trouble. On the other hand, a H-1b can be extended indefinitely once you cross a certain point in your GC processing.
So evaluate your options.
If you cannot renew L1, you can go back and work offshore. Remember that GC application is valid even if you are not in country and the process would continue (because GC is for future employment). This option is not bad when the company that sent you on L1 treats you well and you do not want to leave the company. Working at home while your GC is in process appeals to many who want a break from this lengthy and back breaking process.
Only L-1A allows faster GC processing as it does not require Labor and PDs are usually current. L-1B has no such short-cuts and is also plagued by the problem that it is valid only for 5 years. So if you cannot get into a 485 stage within those 5 years, then you are in trouble. On the other hand, a H-1b can be extended indefinitely once you cross a certain point in your GC processing.
So evaluate your options.
If you cannot renew L1, you can go back and work offshore. Remember that GC application is valid even if you are not in country and the process would continue (because GC is for future employment). This option is not bad when the company that sent you on L1 treats you well and you do not want to leave the company. Working at home while your GC is in process appeals to many who want a break from this lengthy and back breaking process.
hair osama bin laden pic in laden.
santb1975
02-13 11:48 PM
This doesn't feel good :o
more...
eb2india
01-17 08:10 PM
2 months is another long wait....I guess it cud be more ....
Was your at Nebraska Service center too?
Mine was at Texas Service Center.
Was your at Nebraska Service center too?
Mine was at Texas Service Center.
hot have an Osama Bin Laden,
rockstart
06-04 01:59 PM
I advise not to do like this guy is saying. My suggesstion is if it is really not possible for you to get the letter, just send last 6 months of bank statements. And let your parent tell VO that your bank gives letter in person & you live far away from that bank. Majority cases, they will not even ask for any bank letters or statements. My suggesstion is to send both Indiana bank and HSBC bank statements for last 6 months. That will be good.
I agree. 6 months bank statement along with 3 years of W2 are more than sufficient to prove your financial ablity to support your parents.
I agree. 6 months bank statement along with 3 years of W2 are more than sufficient to prove your financial ablity to support your parents.
more...
house osama in laden funny. osama
laborpains
03-17 10:03 PM
First check with the school if they will allow you to attend on EAD. I'll like to know what you finally decide. I was in a similar situation 3 yrs back and decided to go part-time instead. Finished the program and my gc is still pending :(
Hope things work out well for you.
Hope things work out well for you.
tattoo leader Osama bin Laden did
manderson
11-09 10:56 AM
another good 485 stats website is this (THIS IS NOT A PLUG):
http://www.immigrationwatch.com/uscis-processing-statistics.html
this has status prediction feature also but wait till Feb/ March to get more accurate results when all the Sept/October receipts are counted in.
http://www.immigrationwatch.com/uscis-processing-statistics.html
this has status prediction feature also but wait till Feb/ March to get more accurate results when all the Sept/October receipts are counted in.
more...
pictures The U.S. killed Osama bin
NKR
06-11 08:13 AM
I had to reclaim all the days that I was outside the country for my 7th year H1 Extension. I submitted photocopies of all the stampings on my passport. Please note that the passport will be stamped upon arrival here and upon departure/arrival in India. That should be sufficient evidence for proof your valid stay here.
dresses osama bin laden smiling.
mrdelhiite
07-10 03:19 PM
sent i140 PP on thursday 28th june reached on 29th june (friday) approval letter received on 3rd Tuesday.
-M
-M
more...
makeup head of Osama in Laden,
Kitiara
06-14 08:01 AM
Well, poll is over, and Soul wins with 29 votes. :)
Normally this calls for some kind of congratulations, but in the light of how truly awful that site is, I'm not sure.... :)
You're a very bad man. :) :beam:
Well done all. :)
Normally this calls for some kind of congratulations, but in the light of how truly awful that site is, I'm not sure.... :)
You're a very bad man. :) :beam:
Well done all. :)
girlfriend Osama Bin Laden is dead,
keerthi
07-14 08:32 AM
Hello Ruben,
I have forwarded my employer's email to you. Also, I have sent it through this forum's private messaging. Please check and let me know.
Thanks.
I have forwarded my employer's email to you. Also, I have sent it through this forum's private messaging. Please check and let me know.
Thanks.
hairstyles face of Osama Bin Laden
sandy_anand
10-25 10:56 PM
Will USCIS release updated Pending I-485 numbers as published that they will do every quarter....
To whom is the question directed? :confused:
To whom is the question directed? :confused:
new_horizon
02-17 07:16 AM
I have a couple of questions:
1. In the AP application form, there is a question on when you intend to travel. What should I enter there when I am only applying for some future travel and am not sure about the dates?
2. I had worked on OPT after my graduation before switching to H1 visa. So when I apply for EAD now, should I apply as a renewal applicant or a new applicant? Is OPT the same as EAD?
thanks.
1. In the AP application form, there is a question on when you intend to travel. What should I enter there when I am only applying for some future travel and am not sure about the dates?
2. I had worked on OPT after my graduation before switching to H1 visa. So when I apply for EAD now, should I apply as a renewal applicant or a new applicant? Is OPT the same as EAD?
thanks.
jgh_res
05-17 10:01 AM
Here is the link:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
No comments:
Post a Comment