smuggymba
01-14 08:58 AM
There was a huge discussion during the presedential campaign on why Obama is a great choice...but looks like he is just another socialist democrat. John Mccain would have been a better choice, but we can't control this so best of luck to all. There are plenty of jobs in other countries including india. not the end of world.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
sodh
01-27 08:55 PM
Can please somebody reply, is this a non profit organisation or everytime somebody ask's some innocent question he is bombarded with counter questions like have you contributed, I can understand the frustations when there are freebee's but please everybody has his limitations,this reminds of bania's in mumbai you will get your your grocerries only if you have paid your previous debt's. Please don't force anybody, this makes every core members feel cheap, if somebody has to contribute he will contribute out of guilt out, of appreciation,out of obligation, we have not forgotten our dharma that is to help anybody that helps us.
rb_248
12-13 11:39 AM
Hello All,
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
This is a good point. But, in its current state, will not fly. This can only be used as a supporting evidence for our cause. Lawmakers will never remove country cap. We can use this point in pushing any of our other agendas.
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
This is a good point. But, in its current state, will not fly. This can only be used as a supporting evidence for our cause. Lawmakers will never remove country cap. We can use this point in pushing any of our other agendas.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
unitednations
02-13 12:35 AM
Keep in mind that only unused visas in eb1 and eb2 row filter down to eb3.
Just about everybody from ROW is currently filing in eb2 and using up the visas and there is less to filter down to eb3.
AC21 re-allocated visas every quarter if the total demand was less then the total visas available. This is not currently the situation. Therefore, the visas won't filter down to eb3 which went unused. This gives a chance for people from ROW to keep filing in eb1 and eb2. In the last quarter is when you will see the jump, if any because the unused visas will get allocated at that time.(keep in mind that BEC's are also releasing labors - as far as I know the april 2001 labors from california have not been approved yet; and there are a great number from that state).
In the last year I know of at least three people and I imagine there are thousands more who did this:
They enter on visitors visas. Their I-94 card may be valid for 90 days or 180 days. They have a pre-arrangement with a company or relative to find a company who will file perm labor in eb2; file 140 and 485 and then stay and get their greencard this way. Since perm labors get approved very fast and ROW people are filing in eb2 then they are taking up the quota. Main requirement of filing 485 is one has to be in valid non immigrant status. Anyone who enters USA in non immigrant status (h-1, h-4, L-1, F-1, F-2, B-1/B-2, etc.) and can get a perm labor approved in eb2 and they are from row will get their greencard in less then six months.
Just about everybody from ROW is currently filing in eb2 and using up the visas and there is less to filter down to eb3.
AC21 re-allocated visas every quarter if the total demand was less then the total visas available. This is not currently the situation. Therefore, the visas won't filter down to eb3 which went unused. This gives a chance for people from ROW to keep filing in eb1 and eb2. In the last quarter is when you will see the jump, if any because the unused visas will get allocated at that time.(keep in mind that BEC's are also releasing labors - as far as I know the april 2001 labors from california have not been approved yet; and there are a great number from that state).
In the last year I know of at least three people and I imagine there are thousands more who did this:
They enter on visitors visas. Their I-94 card may be valid for 90 days or 180 days. They have a pre-arrangement with a company or relative to find a company who will file perm labor in eb2; file 140 and 485 and then stay and get their greencard this way. Since perm labors get approved very fast and ROW people are filing in eb2 then they are taking up the quota. Main requirement of filing 485 is one has to be in valid non immigrant status. Anyone who enters USA in non immigrant status (h-1, h-4, L-1, F-1, F-2, B-1/B-2, etc.) and can get a perm labor approved in eb2 and they are from row will get their greencard in less then six months.
more...
samay
07-29 08:33 AM
While applying EAD online, by mistake I put family name as first name and first name as last name, Now I have got RFE saying service record indicates my name is different, so send birth certhificate. Do I need to send a cover letter saying this was mistake and I swapped the name by mistake.
Can It be corrected or it is very seroius mistake.
Yes it can be corrected at this time. You can answer the RFE yourself and explain you mistake or ask your attorney to do so. I would suggest that contact your attorney so that you can prevent any future mistakes.
Can It be corrected or it is very seroius mistake.
Yes it can be corrected at this time. You can answer the RFE yourself and explain you mistake or ask your attorney to do so. I would suggest that contact your attorney so that you can prevent any future mistakes.
mundada
12-13 02:00 PM
I think you have made a great argument. The original intention of diversity quota was to prevent people from certain European countries from becoming a dominant race in the US in 1920s.
However, the Civil Rights Act that protects national origin came into effect in 1964.
I am not a lawyer but have been taking business law course. I therefore believe if national origin discrimination is not allowed in the employment then unusually high (5 years) green card delays for certain nationalities is promoting national origin discrimination by detering employers from hiring people born in certain countries.
I think this argument will fly. I am not sure family based restrictions could be lifted but national origin quota restriction on employment and national origin non-discrimination in employment are definitely contradicting each other.
FYI:
TITLE VII of the 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT (1964)
The protected classes: race, color, sex, religion & national origin. Employers with 15 or more employees. The most well known employment discrimination statute. Prohibits employment discrimination against the protected classes - race, color, sex, religion & national origin – in every aspect of employment, i.e. hiring, firing, promotion, training, working conditions, compensation, etc.
Hello All,
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
However, the Civil Rights Act that protects national origin came into effect in 1964.
I am not a lawyer but have been taking business law course. I therefore believe if national origin discrimination is not allowed in the employment then unusually high (5 years) green card delays for certain nationalities is promoting national origin discrimination by detering employers from hiring people born in certain countries.
I think this argument will fly. I am not sure family based restrictions could be lifted but national origin quota restriction on employment and national origin non-discrimination in employment are definitely contradicting each other.
FYI:
TITLE VII of the 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT (1964)
The protected classes: race, color, sex, religion & national origin. Employers with 15 or more employees. The most well known employment discrimination statute. Prohibits employment discrimination against the protected classes - race, color, sex, religion & national origin – in every aspect of employment, i.e. hiring, firing, promotion, training, working conditions, compensation, etc.
Hello All,
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
more...
nixstor
07-03 04:24 PM
Any other way you can get in touch with her... phone??
I already tried. Looks like she is gone for the holiday. Call 202 513 2000 and by pressing the numbers on the phone you can get to her VM as of now.
I already tried. Looks like she is gone for the holiday. Call 202 513 2000 and by pressing the numbers on the phone you can get to her VM as of now.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
jkays94
05-25 12:08 PM
I heard that if you apply on your own and move out of US, it becomes very difficult to let the Can immigration authority about your current location and keep track of all the correspondence with them. But, the agency/lawyer does this thing very efficiantly. Any opinion on this ?
You can update your address online through the e-client tool. The only issue might be that your case may be transferred to a consulate location closer to you.
http://services3.cic.gc.ca/ecas/ECAS.jsp?language=english&page=ECAS.jsp
You can update your address online through the e-client tool. The only issue might be that your case may be transferred to a consulate location closer to you.
http://services3.cic.gc.ca/ecas/ECAS.jsp?language=english&page=ECAS.jsp
more...
BharatPremi
07-13 01:47 AM
As I mentioned, I love it in the States. But to love the States is not to say other places are not also very good. And when weighing your options between perpetual immigration and settling somewhere else, there might be value in considering other options. Which by the way, is the point of the this thread. Perhaps nuance is lost on someone of your obvious genius.
Also, I was quoting from a set of facts related to The Economists quality of life Indexes. Helping to inform people. In addition to that, I've lived many, many years in all 3 countries.
You on the other hand, contributed exactly what to the conversation?
I hope you recall your message to me next time you complain about the US immigration system and they say "So? If you hate it so much, why don't you F@@K off back to where you came from?"
SWO,
I would not take much to reply your junk...I have also replied to other one so please read that... I can be ready to read your ... if you first prove by taking Canadian Immigration and start writing this junk from your promising land of Canada. IN that case not only me but many others would see legitimacy.As long as you are on USA land please do not be contradictory... That is it. Bye for now.
Also, I was quoting from a set of facts related to The Economists quality of life Indexes. Helping to inform people. In addition to that, I've lived many, many years in all 3 countries.
You on the other hand, contributed exactly what to the conversation?
I hope you recall your message to me next time you complain about the US immigration system and they say "So? If you hate it so much, why don't you F@@K off back to where you came from?"
SWO,
I would not take much to reply your junk...I have also replied to other one so please read that... I can be ready to read your ... if you first prove by taking Canadian Immigration and start writing this junk from your promising land of Canada. IN that case not only me but many others would see legitimacy.As long as you are on USA land please do not be contradictory... That is it. Bye for now.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
small2006
08-18 06:41 PM
You are so wrong here...its not about growing balls or Americans getting frisked in Indian airports.
It is SRK's BIG EGO that was hurt, the fact that the officer did not "recognize" SRK - the "king khan" and made him go through a rough ordeal. That is all it is about. And to me SRK has never been an honest human being. It is all a put on appearance, whether its in his movies or real life. He is very measured and guarded when talking to the media and presents his affable side. So get over it and look at the incident for what it is - i.e, SRK's big ego burst open. Its not about American security or Indian security or racial profiling. Everyone is just trying to make it out to be that but you need to be able to see thorugh that.
When a person of Dr Kalam's stature did not even talk about his experience with Continental until months later, who the heck is SRK to make it out to be such a big deal? What is his achievement and/or contribution to the country after all? Making loads of money? Buying houses in London and Dubai?? Give me a freakin' break.
simply racial profiling.
i dont think SRK is over reacting.. many desis who are accepting that its a way of life suffer from "Slave Mentality".
When was the last time.. a US diplomat or US socialite was frisked and detained for 2 hrs in indian airports?
To all the jocks who argue "its part of life"..my advise grow some balls and realize one thing.. no matter how long u live here.. no matter whether u have GC or PC...u will always be treated like third class citizens.
In the end its the color.. do you know beta.
for the record.i am no SRK fan.
Mamooty.. who is he?
It is SRK's BIG EGO that was hurt, the fact that the officer did not "recognize" SRK - the "king khan" and made him go through a rough ordeal. That is all it is about. And to me SRK has never been an honest human being. It is all a put on appearance, whether its in his movies or real life. He is very measured and guarded when talking to the media and presents his affable side. So get over it and look at the incident for what it is - i.e, SRK's big ego burst open. Its not about American security or Indian security or racial profiling. Everyone is just trying to make it out to be that but you need to be able to see thorugh that.
When a person of Dr Kalam's stature did not even talk about his experience with Continental until months later, who the heck is SRK to make it out to be such a big deal? What is his achievement and/or contribution to the country after all? Making loads of money? Buying houses in London and Dubai?? Give me a freakin' break.
simply racial profiling.
i dont think SRK is over reacting.. many desis who are accepting that its a way of life suffer from "Slave Mentality".
When was the last time.. a US diplomat or US socialite was frisked and detained for 2 hrs in indian airports?
To all the jocks who argue "its part of life"..my advise grow some balls and realize one thing.. no matter how long u live here.. no matter whether u have GC or PC...u will always be treated like third class citizens.
In the end its the color.. do you know beta.
for the record.i am no SRK fan.
Mamooty.. who is he?
more...
gonecrazyonh4
07-03 08:29 PM
Done my part hoping it would help
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
GotGC??
05-17 06:30 PM
Or did you mean the other way around?
I personally know of 2 friends - live within half a mile of where I do, who got their GCs using labor substitution. If the lawyer and sponsoring company are good, go for it. Keep in mind that this is going to go away soon.........
I personally know of 2 friends - live within half a mile of where I do, who got their GCs using labor substitution. If the lawyer and sponsoring company are good, go for it. Keep in mind that this is going to go away soon.........
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
gcisadawg
07-17 12:09 PM
DOS (or any government agency for that matter) cannot interpert the law differently for each year. One law and one interpretation. It can't follow the different set of rules when implementing the law each year. Initally, INA was designed to follow vertical spill over (diversity was important than preference catagory). But, AC21 law ameneded the INA to force the DOS to implement horizontal spill over (preference catagory is important than diversity). However, DOS was still follwing verical spill over evenafter the AC21 act till 2006. If DOS followd the law correctly, EB2-I and Ch would have never been retrogressed since 2005. Lucky for DOS, no one has challanged the DOS. Now they realized the mistake and follow the law correctly. They follw this till if congress changes the law.
Yes, horizontal spill-over gives preference to EB Category. But the vertical spillover didnt promote diversity. It just ensured that the applicant with the oldest PD was allotted the first available spill-over visa number irrespective of his EB category or country of origin. This just ensured that someone doesnt wait too long. as you know, most of the vertical spillovers were consumed by EB3-India and china. Then, how can it promote diversity.
to make it simple, here is my understanding
Vertical spill over --> PD precedes EB category and Country of Origin
Horizontal spill over --> EB Category precedes PD and country of origin.
Thanks,
gcisadawg
Yes, horizontal spill-over gives preference to EB Category. But the vertical spillover didnt promote diversity. It just ensured that the applicant with the oldest PD was allotted the first available spill-over visa number irrespective of his EB category or country of origin. This just ensured that someone doesnt wait too long. as you know, most of the vertical spillovers were consumed by EB3-India and china. Then, how can it promote diversity.
to make it simple, here is my understanding
Vertical spill over --> PD precedes EB category and Country of Origin
Horizontal spill over --> EB Category precedes PD and country of origin.
Thanks,
gcisadawg
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
satishku_2000
01-23 04:47 PM
Hey
I agree with you guys that he deservs much more stricter sentence.
Some of the guys work against us because we are sound different and look different. So dont get into that mode ...
These kind of small statements can become a big issue particularly in a public forum like this.
Simple suggestion and peace , I dont mean to offend any one ...
I agree with you guys that he deservs much more stricter sentence.
Some of the guys work against us because we are sound different and look different. So dont get into that mode ...
These kind of small statements can become a big issue particularly in a public forum like this.
Simple suggestion and peace , I dont mean to offend any one ...
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
roseball
01-13 04:43 PM
Is this some thing needs to pass or in proposal or already effected since the date they published on the website?
I have not ready the doc.
This is neither a proposal nor a bill that needs to go through the process. Its a memo to the USCIS service centers providing clarity on whats an employer-employee relationship means for a H1 petition to be considered for approval. The memo claims there was no clarity on what constitutes a fair employer-employee relationship and provides guidance to the USCIS service centers to follow the memo in processing all H1 applications. So technically, I would assume it is effective on the date it was released.
I have not ready the doc.
This is neither a proposal nor a bill that needs to go through the process. Its a memo to the USCIS service centers providing clarity on whats an employer-employee relationship means for a H1 petition to be considered for approval. The memo claims there was no clarity on what constitutes a fair employer-employee relationship and provides guidance to the USCIS service centers to follow the memo in processing all H1 applications. So technically, I would assume it is effective on the date it was released.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
nozerd
09-30 10:14 AM
I have done a lot of research on this :::
A good option is if you try and get a job in Detroit, MI. You can then live across the border in Windsor, ON and commute daily between Canada and US.Windsor is basically suburb of Detroit right across from Detroit river ex like Mumbai and Navi Mumbai, Hyderabad and Secundrabad etc.
This way you get best of both worlds
1) You keep H1B visa and US GC going.
2) You earn in US $ and can avail of US job opportunity.
3) You can earn time towards maintaining Canadian PR and Canadian Citizenship.
Disadvantage
1) This option is limited to getting a job/transfer in Detroit Metro area.
2) Some days there may be delay at border if US is on high alert, so you need to be conservative and add time for border inspection to your commute.
3) You have to file taxes in both US and Canada (but its not double taxes).
A good option is if you try and get a job in Detroit, MI. You can then live across the border in Windsor, ON and commute daily between Canada and US.Windsor is basically suburb of Detroit right across from Detroit river ex like Mumbai and Navi Mumbai, Hyderabad and Secundrabad etc.
This way you get best of both worlds
1) You keep H1B visa and US GC going.
2) You earn in US $ and can avail of US job opportunity.
3) You can earn time towards maintaining Canadian PR and Canadian Citizenship.
Disadvantage
1) This option is limited to getting a job/transfer in Detroit Metro area.
2) Some days there may be delay at border if US is on high alert, so you need to be conservative and add time for border inspection to your commute.
3) You have to file taxes in both US and Canada (but its not double taxes).
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
somegchuh
10-10 01:01 PM
Can someone clarify the following for me?
1. How hard/easy is it to get TN visa? Is it restricted only to specialized professions like H1 or can ppl with general office (HR/marketing) etc also get TN visa?
2. Can spouse work or is it same state as H4?
3. How hard/easy is it to switch jobs?
4. What does it take to apply for green card while on TN (without switching to H status)
5. Anyone tried L1 route from Canada to US?
Basically, my question is it worth the trouble trying to get a GC if you are a canadian citizen?
1. How hard/easy is it to get TN visa? Is it restricted only to specialized professions like H1 or can ppl with general office (HR/marketing) etc also get TN visa?
2. Can spouse work or is it same state as H4?
3. How hard/easy is it to switch jobs?
4. What does it take to apply for green card while on TN (without switching to H status)
5. Anyone tried L1 route from Canada to US?
Basically, my question is it worth the trouble trying to get a GC if you are a canadian citizen?
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
peacocklover
09-25 04:17 PM
Fantastic idea, it will bring OXYGEN to this bedridden economy. We need to contact real estate media channels like HDTV for the support to project through their media.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
polapragada
09-24 12:30 AM
Sent the E-mail. tomorrow I will send another E-mail from my official ID
Marphad
06-08 11:08 AM
employment based is just one part of the immigration thing. If you think EB immigration is important - there will be thousands of opinions from people who will say why other immigration is also important.
Actually as per government's official point of view, EB comes on second priority than FB. Family union always comes on first priority.
Actually as per government's official point of view, EB comes on second priority than FB. Family union always comes on first priority.
sumagiri
07-23 05:42 PM
CIS First 8 months story : EB2 India/China use all numbers (around 3k and get retrogress), EB1 and EB2-ROW use usual avarege numbers (EB1=24k and EB2ROW=14K) : Total 41K.
If total 100K cases where approved EB3 got its share of 50k+. With changed interpretation they should get no more.
Sachug22,
Are you implying that there are more EB3 approvals than EB2 this year for first 8 months ? Doesn't seem right.
If total 100K cases where approved EB3 got its share of 50k+. With changed interpretation they should get no more.
Sachug22,
Are you implying that there are more EB3 approvals than EB2 this year for first 8 months ? Doesn't seem right.
No comments:
Post a Comment