PDA

View Full Version : Unused Visas


tdasara
02-02-2007, 03:10 PM
Has anyone got an idea of unused visas from EB1 and ROW EB2?

It just can't be right the EB2 movement for India and China is hardly moving since EB1 is current and EB2 ROW is current since 6-10 months.

Which category does the unused/overflow visas go?

None of the lawyers I emailed have an answer (they like this retrogression btw more $).

USCIS doesn't care if a non citizen asks a question.

chanduv23
02-02-2007, 03:19 PM
According to a specialist on immigration forums "Mr UnitedNations" the unused visas are directly being used for EB3 ROW , I am not how he knows that but maybe thats what is happening.

Maybe EB3 ROW being a diverse group is being given more precendence than highly subscribed countries.

ash0210
02-02-2007, 03:19 PM
We understand retrogression is due to non availability of visa but we will have some comfort factor, if we know un-used visa# that may move PD...

Anybody have any statisctics on unused visa# for last couple of years?
Thanks in advance..

Has anyone got an idea of unused visas from EB1 and ROW EB2?

It just can't be right the EB2 movement for India and China is hardly moving since EB1 is current and EB2 ROW is current since 6-10 months.

Which category does the unused/overflow visas go?

None of the lawyers I emailed have an answer (they like this retrogression btw more $).

USCIS doesn't care if a non citizen asks a question.

masti_Gai
02-02-2007, 03:30 PM
Rest of the World (ROW):)

raju123
02-02-2007, 03:30 PM
ROW : Rest Of the World

ash0210
02-02-2007, 03:33 PM
ROW (Rest Of World)

What does ROW stand for?

amitjoey
02-02-2007, 04:35 PM
Visas are divided equally -country wise quota - no country can have more than 7% of worldwide quota. Countries like India, China, Mexico, Phillipines that have more professionals in the USA. So these countries get retrogressed. EB(Employment based) greencard applicants from these countries have to wait.
Rest of the world (ROW) EB2 (ROW) do not have to wait, their dates are current.

Gravitation
02-02-2007, 07:22 PM
According to a specialist on immigration forums "Mr UnitedNations" the unused visas are directly being used for EB3 ROW , I am not how he knows that but maybe thats what is happening.

Maybe EB3 ROW being a diverse group is being given more precendence than highly subscribed countries.
This information was there on a visa bulletin. This is not a guess but a confirmed fact.

Gravitation
02-02-2007, 07:27 PM
What does it mean to say EB2 ROW? What is the reference point of Rest of World? Thanks.
Rest of World means all countries which are not listed separately in the visa bulletins. It means all countries except India, China, Mexico and Philippins.

chiecoli
02-02-2007, 08:30 PM
90,000 VISAS

Our contacts in Washington have told us that there is a growing chance of a bill to recapture as many as 90,000 visas. The language of the draft bill that we've seen calls for a full recapture of the unused visas from 2000-04.

EVERYONE should contact their Congressman and let them know just how important this is.

posted by Hammond Law Group LLC @ 6:23 PM

chanukya
02-02-2007, 08:34 PM
90000--please post the link.

90,000 VISAS

Our contacts in Washington have told us that there is a growing chance of a bill to recapture as many as 90,000 visas. The language of the draft bill that we've seen calls for a full recapture of the unused visas from 2000-04.

EVERYONE should contact their Congressman and let them know just how important this is.

posted by Hammond Law Group LLC @ 6:23 PM

chanukya
02-02-2007, 08:45 PM
http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/alerts/1.23.2007_hcalert.htm

Carlau
02-02-2007, 09:36 PM
What is the meaning of Schedule A? Do they help us? Thanks.
Schedule A is for Registered Nurses and Physical Therapists

alisa
02-02-2007, 09:45 PM
Can someone please explain in more detail how visa numbers are divided up.
For example, if you have 140K visas, how many go to
EB1
EB2 ROW, EB2 India, EB2 China, EB2 phillipines
EB3 ROW, EB3 Indian, EB3 China, EB3 Phillipines.

What happens with EB1 has unused visas? How do they flow?
What happens with EB2 has unused visas? Where do they go?


An illustrative example would be great.



Visas are divided equally -country wise quota - no country can have more than 7% of worldwide quota. Countries like India, China, Mexico, Phillipines that have more professionals in the USA. So these countries get retrogressed. EB(Employment based) greencard applicants from these countries have to wait.
Rest of the world (ROW) EB2 (ROW) do not have to wait, their dates are current.

ash0210
02-02-2007, 09:55 PM
Last time, strong lobby Schedule A/Nursing forced Congressman's to allot 50,000 non-used visas to "Nursing" Schedule A....

I dont know how WE will protect once again from this Schedule A lobbiest!!

http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/alerts/1.23.2007_hcalert.htm

tdasara
02-02-2007, 10:04 PM
50,000 unused visas were given to Schedule A in 2005. When the bill was first introduced the unused visas 100,000+ was supposed to go to EB3 since there was retrogression in just EB3 category and Schedule A was part of EB3.

After debate for a few days 50,000 of these were allocated to Schedule A and the EB3 retrogression was forgotten and never been fixed since.

Hope this doesn't happen again.

There are around 100,000 unused visas...am not sure if anyone takes UCSIS to court if these can be reallocated.

UNUSED VISAS WERE DUE TO uscis INEFFICIENCY!!! Make sense if they make amends.

alisa
02-02-2007, 10:22 PM
BTW, our dear macacay.
I am surprised to see that you don't know what ROW is.....

P.S.
I apologize for this utterly useless posting, but I really wanted to use the word 'macacay', the sub-continentalized version of 'macaca'



Is there a USCIS URL/publication that explains the following? Thanks.

These should be USCIS rules like IRS rules. Everyone should be entitled to see them like IRS rules.

msp1976
02-02-2007, 10:27 PM
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/usc_sec_08_00001153----000-.html


This gives the current statute about the numbers between EB1/2/3


The Unused in EB1 would be available for EB2 ...Unused EB1/EB2 would be available for EB3...

msp1976
02-02-2007, 10:34 PM
For all the current immigration and nationality law
Use URL and search for title 8..
http://uscode.house.gov/search/criteria.shtml

msp1976
02-02-2007, 10:38 PM
Is there a USCIS URL/publication that explains the following? Thanks.

These should be USCIS rules like IRS rules. Everyone should be entitled to see them like IRS rules.

Yes Sir...You are all entitled to read 10000 lines of goobledegook....

Follow the URLs I posted...

sam2006
02-02-2007, 11:05 PM
USCIS does not give how many Visas they have used and how many are left



like how many unused have gone to EB3 or Eb2 etc
if its Vertical or horizontal visa distribution


they have been some Law Suits on them to give the data

nozerd
02-03-2007, 09:54 AM
Its like your boss asking you to tell him how many hrs you do actual work v/s how many hrs do you do non work related things. Would you volunterily disclose your wasted time at work every day ?
You will disclose total hrs you worked but not time you didnt work :)

USCIS does not give how many Visas they have used and how many are left



like how many unused have gone to EB3 or Eb2 etc
if its Vertical or horizontal visa distribution


they have been some Law Suits on them to give the data

ramaonline
02-03-2007, 09:31 PM
note that unused visa numbers from prior years do not automatically go to a specific category such as EB2/EB3/ Schedule A etc
There needs to be a legislation to recapture unused visa numbers - In 2004 a bill was passed which provided 50k additional visas for schedule A occupations (EB3)

msp1976
02-03-2007, 10:09 PM
I have to first think of the words that I have to search for. Alisa has already picked on me that I don't even know ROW, RIR, Schedule A. This is not very useful for me.

Is there a Java Specification kind of book that I can start from begining to end? Thanks.

No one wants to pick on you...Please do not take the jabbing too seriously...We are all in this together..

Well the law code is kind of written in this fashion only...The cornell education site is better...Or just for the sake of how the numbers are devided between EB1/2/3 you can read the visa bulletin...It has a simplified breakup..

My comment about 'goobledegook' was not a criticism of your abilities...It was about the complexity of immigration code....Well you see..we all have to hire attorneys because of this complexity and no one is at fault...Am just trying to help in any way I can....

http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3111.html

Pineapple
02-03-2007, 11:03 PM
Here is a good thread where retrogression, schedule A etc is discussed and explained:

http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2320

viva
02-03-2007, 11:44 PM
According to a specialist on immigration forums "Mr UnitedNations" the unused visas are directly being used for EB3 ROW , I am not how he knows that but maybe thats what is happening.

Maybe EB3 ROW being a diverse group is being given more precendence than highly subscribed countries.


Your posts are getting very irritating with this blind belief in this "Unitednations" fellow. Why do you believe in him so much? What has he done?

msp1976
02-04-2007, 06:38 AM
Originally Posted by chanduv23
According to a specialist on immigration forums "Mr UnitedNations" the unused visas are directly being used for EB3 ROW , I am not how he knows that but maybe thats what is happening.

Maybe EB3 ROW being a diverse group is being given more precendence than highly subscribed countries.

Your posts are getting very irritating with this blind belief in this "Unitednations" fellow. Why do you believe in him so much? What has he done?

It is true that all EB1/EB2 overflow visas at this point and in the next few months would get used for EB3 ROW...If and when EB3 ROW becomes current, at that point the overflow visas would be used for EB3 China/India...
That is because the country cap 7% and 5% for dependents is already satisfied for China/India....

You have to understand the caps work in a complicated way..

total EB cap 140K
EB5 - 7.1% anything not used flows downward in the list..
EB4 - 7.1% anything not used flows downward in the list
EB1 - 28.6% anything not used flows downward in the list
EB2 - 28.6% anything not used flows downward in the list
EB3 - 28.6% nothing usually left...Anything left is not used ... Those are the unused numbers everyone wants to recpature....
Schedule A Workers: Employment First, Second, and Third preference Schedule A applicants are entitled to up to 50,000 “recaptured” numbers. These are folks from medical occupations...nurses etc...

In addition to this there is a country cap of 7% for principal and 5% for dependents..






Let's not get irritated...Please concentrate on the information and not the person...

unitednations
02-04-2007, 08:00 AM
Your posts are getting very irritating with this blind belief in this "Unitednations" fellow. Why do you believe in him so much? What has he done?

People in this forum are about 1.5 years behind in the understanding of retrogression (all of these issues have been dissected, diseminated, corroborated, etc.); how the law works; what visa bulletin said in November 2005. dissecting numbers, etc.

There is much deeper understanding of this on immigration.com since it has been going on for a while. Chandu is a member there and has been following it and participating on it.

I would think something as important as this; one would research it to death and get all possible statistics on it. All these things have already been laid out in great detail very long ago.

Don't know why you are irritated??? Maybe you should research it with the law and the various statistics by uscis, dol, dos and see what conclusions you can come up with.

msp1976
02-04-2007, 10:13 AM
Purpose and goal of the organization is to further your interests...
Whatever question you ask, we shall make an attempt to answer.....Even if it has been answered before ......we would again answer....

Do you find your questions answered ???...Do you think that this activity is useful...??

Please contribute to IV to further your interests....

chanduv23
02-04-2007, 10:37 AM
Purpose and goal of the organization is to further your interests...
Whatever question you ask, we shall make an attempt to answer.....Even if it has been answered ....before we would again answer....

Do you find your questions answered ???...Do you think that this activity is useful...??

Please contribute to IV to further your interests....

As it is a forum and everyone have common in interests, while questions are answered, it is also important that we have collective opinions and conclusions, ie everyone helps each other with experience and no one does things for commercial purposes.

I have seen people not liking what I write, though I am not an expert, if you notice my posts, I always insist on being careful and not believeing employers or lawyers and not make your own conclusions about GC or USCIS or DOL or employers or Lawyers.

While most people want green cards, they do not realise that things are not the same as before, and maybe green card may or may not even be an option (that includes me too), which does not mean that we must not try or do what we can. Thats why I support IV, I have contributed $200 so far and will be contributing.

If someone can contribute with ideas, guidances, experience, that is also a contribution. I have seen lot of posts saying, we must dress up as Gandhi in Washington DC and have a strike, a day without h1b etc and ask for Green Cards. Such things may be possible if we have a majority like the illegals. If H1bs grow in millions, then it is a option. Such a situation may not arise. H1b system can be corrected at grassroots and IV is one such organization capable of achieving this without protests and strikes.

alisa
02-04-2007, 10:55 AM
I agree that this topic should be researched, and we should have all possible statistics/data on it.
I tried to locate on immigration.com, but I couldn't find the information. I will continue to look.
If Mr Chandu, or Mr Unitednations could quickly locate the links, and post them here, I (we) would be greatful.


People in this forum are about 1.5 years behind in the understanding of retrogression (all of these issues have been dissected, diseminated, corroborated, etc.); how the law works; what visa bulletin said in November 2005. dissecting numbers, etc.

There is much deeper understanding of this on immigration.com since it has been going on for a while. Chandu is a member there and has been following it and participating on it.

I would think something as important as this; one would research it to death and get all possible statistics on it. All these things have already been laid out in great detail very long ago.

Don't know why you are irritated??? Maybe you should research it with the law and the various statistics by uscis, dol, dos and see what conclusions you can come up with.

longq
02-04-2007, 11:25 AM
Mr Unitednation takes the advantages of ignorance (in immgration law) of most of the forum members and spreading wrong information in both web sites.

Of course he is very informative, however he is very biased and having wrong openion that EB3 India has stolen EB3_ROW number in previous years as he belongs to ROW. He wrongly assumes that till EB3-ROW becomes current EB2 & EB3-India will not see any movement. He thinks no one knows the rules, laws ect..and he is only one knows everything. The actual fact is most peoples have been doing research on retrogression like him last two years and not having enough time to reply his post. To fuel his openion DOS is violating the section 202 of INA and no one cares about this including IV core team.

If you want to know true color of Unitednation visit this site.

http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=225197&page=3&pp=15&highlight=outlook

If you want to know how unused visanumbers suppose to work as per the law, visit this site.

http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2659&highlight=century

alisa
02-04-2007, 12:05 PM
I read your post, and your thread. All the way down to what the definitions of "is", "and" and "or" are.

First of all, lets keep the discussion civilized. Lets not comment and post on what other people think, or what their motivations are, or how biased or wrong they are.

I think we all agree that the current situation is that unused EB2-ROW numbers are flowing down to EB-3 ROW, and not across to EB2.

Regardless of what the definition of "is" is, EB-3 ROW will like things the way they are, and EB-2 India would want things to change in their favor.

Lets not fight over who should get more crumbs. Lets work to increase the size of the pie.

Lets figure out who is getting screwed, and big are they getting screwed. And then reach out to those who are getting screwed, and get them to contribute and join IV and participate.





Mr Unitednation takes the advantages of ignorance (in immgration law) of most of the forum members and spreading wrong information in both web sites.

Of course he is very informative, however he is very biased and having wrong openion that EB3 India has stolen EB3_ROW number in previous years as he belongs to ROW. He wrongly assumes that till EB3-ROW becomes current EB2 & EB3-India will not see any movement. He thinks no one knows the rules, laws ect..and he is only one knows everything. The actual fact is most peoples have been doing research on retrogression like him last two years and not having enough time to reply his post. To fuel his openion DOS is violating the section 202 of INA and no one cares about this including IV core team.

If you want to know true color of Unitednation visit this site.

http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=225197&page=3&pp=15&highlight=outlook

If you want to know how unused visanumbers suppose to work as per the law, visit this site.

http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2659&highlight=century

chanduv23
02-04-2007, 12:15 PM
While, I have not made any analysis on this or do not have any basis, I just reiterated what unitednations and others have written before.

From my perspective (once again, this is just my thoughts), it looks like a slowdown or apply hard country limite for highly subscribed countries maybe a result of a lot of factors like, job market slowing down (2001,2002), complaints that immigrants are taking local jobs, consulting companies selling labors, falsifying resumes to INS or DOL (java programmer actually working in restaurant), people not getting paid prevailing wage, benching etc..... While a comprehensive reform is a good solution to retrogression and all h1bs are taken as serious immigrants, underlying issues need to be fixed before a comprehensive reform to retrogression is there. A lot of loopholes being closed and strigent rules being enacted, change is some laws that don't make sense, understanding the industry needs, issues with wage and tax issues, are things that can be happening behind the scenes (this is just what I think), in addition to backlog elimination and overflow of applicants in an overburdened system.

Once again, it is just my thoughts, which I think explains the patterns to why unused numbers are not flowing to over subscribed countries. Please correct me if I am wrong.

While job market seem to have picked up and demanding, there seems to be a need for flow if talent and that is not happening due to the problems that need to be fixed.

tdasara
02-04-2007, 01:04 PM
I think there would be a substantial relief if unused visas are reallocated to oversubscribed countries as in 2003/2004.

Also the 'side' flow might help immensely.

As I stated earlier only a US Citizen can petition USCIS for release of information.

All we can do is speculate.

rajuram
02-04-2007, 01:12 PM
I think there would be a substantial relief if unused visas are reallocated to oversubscribed countries as in 2003/2004.

Also the 'side' flow might help immensely.

As I stated earlier only a US Citizen can petition USCIS for release of information.

All we can do is speculate.

Keep dreaming, dreams do sometimes come true, but dream gods prefer GC holders..

unitednations
02-04-2007, 01:36 PM
From the November 2005 visa bulletin

http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2712.html
HOW IS THE EMPLOYMENT-BASED PER-COUNTRY LIMIT CALCULATED?

Section 201 of the INA sets an annual minimum Family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000, while the worldwide annual level for Employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 sets the per-country limit for preference immigrants at 7% of the total annual Family-sponsored and Employment-based preference limits, i.e. a minimum of 25,620.

The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.
The 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.
In recent years, the application of the rules outlined in AC21 has allowed countries such as China – mainland born, India, and the Philippines to utilize large amounts of employment numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.
During FY-2006, due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.






-----------------------------------------------

relevant excerpts from above. 7% cap for any one country that is it., Even unused visas in eb1 and eb2 will not go to the retrogressed countries such as china, india. It will flow downwards.

--------
and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.

-------------------

This is a big lie. EB3 went totally unavailable in July to September 2005. When eb3 went unavailable that means no country should have gone over their 7% limit. However, statistics show that certain countries did go over the 7% limit. This is where USCIS/department of state broke the law by giving visas to certain countries that they shouldn't have.

----


In recent years, the application of the rules outlined in AC21 has allowed countries such as China – mainland born, India, and the Philippines to utilize large amounts of employment numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.

unitednations
02-04-2007, 01:39 PM
Mr Unitednation takes the advantages of ignorance (in immgration law) of most of the forum members and spreading wrong information in both web sites.

Of course he is very informative, however he is very biased and having wrong openion that EB3 India has stolen EB3_ROW number in previous years as he belongs to ROW. He wrongly assumes that till EB3-ROW becomes current EB2 & EB3-India will not see any movement. He thinks no one knows the rules, laws ect..and he is only one knows everything. The actual fact is most peoples have been doing research on retrogression like him last two years and not having enough time to reply his post. To fuel his openion DOS is violating the section 202 of INA and no one cares about this including IV core team.

If you want to know true color of Unitednation visit this site.

http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=225197&page=3&pp=15&highlight=outlook

If you want to know how unused visanumbers suppose to work as per the law, visit this site.

http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2659&highlight=century


So please take a crack at how it works. Above posting is right from the horses mouth. As I challenged people if they think DOS/USCIS is breaking the law by going vertical instead of horizontal then they should contact them or sue them. However, no one has been willing to do this.

msp1976
02-04-2007, 01:53 PM
So please take a crack at how it works. Above posting is right from the horses mouth. As I challenged people if they think DOS/USCIS is breaking the law by going vertical instead of horizontal then they should contact them or sue them. However, no one has been willing to do this.


In my opinion by 'Using the unused EB2 visa for EB3 ROW instead of EB2 India', USCIS is following the law as congress pased it...The law may be not fair but that is a different issue...If you want to change the law you have to get that done from the congress...suing USCIS would get you nowhere....

In fact USCIS could do anything they want...They can let it flow vertically or horizontally...And they would have a good enough case in courts...

unitednations
02-04-2007, 01:58 PM
In my opinion by 'Using the unused EB2 visa for EB3 ROW instead of EB2 India', USCIS is following the law as congress pased it...The law may be not fair but that is a different issue...If you want to change the law you have to get that done from the congress...suing USCIS would get you nowhere....


People seem to think uscis/dos is doing it wrong and it should be going horizontal rather then vertical. However, since people just keep getting mad at it because they think dos is doing it wrong but are not willing to do something about it.

The main thing ac21 did differently then before enactment of ac21 was that it allowed unused visas from ROW to be used by other countries on a quarterly basis and not in the final quarter.

One of the frustrations is that dos/uscis was very lazy in approving cases and allowing 485 filings and weren't watching because they allowed too manyh people to file (as soon as there are more applicatoins then visa numbers they are supposed to establish cut off dates). They had more applications then what they can approve long before they actually established cut off dates (January 2005). However, people got spoiled. Now they are going back and being very careful about it. This situation should have presented itself much before it actually did.

unitednations
02-04-2007, 02:08 PM
Hey UN

Are you aware of State Deptt URLs that explain current immigration rules (similar to IRS rules) as following.

Someone posted a URL that requires a good choice of search words. Such a process may not get all info specially for a novice like me. Thanks.



that's right the actual law had two words that could change the actual meaning of how they are supposed to do it (ie., vertical versus horizontal). Some people (i was one of them) thought that at such a stalemate in the words that coomon sense should prevail. Common sense would dictate that skill would prevail over diversity.

However; the rules were always such that there was never any horizontal spillover but rather vertical. The main thing that changed was that the unused visas from row could be used by retrogressed countries quarterly rather then annually.

msp1976
02-04-2007, 02:16 PM
Mr Unitednation takes the advantages of ignorance (in immgration law) of most of the forum members and spreading wrong information in both web sites.

Of course he is very informative, however he is very biased and having wrong openion that EB3 India has stolen EB3_ROW number in previous years as he belongs to ROW. He wrongly assumes that till EB3-ROW becomes current EB2 & EB3-India will not see any movement. He thinks no one knows the rules, laws ect..and he is only one knows everything. The actual fact is most peoples have been doing research on retrogression like him last two years and not having enough time to reply his post. To fuel his openion DOS is violating the section 202 of INA and no one cares about this including IV core team.

If you want to know true color of Unitednation visit this site.

http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=225197&page=3&pp=15&highlight=outlook

If you want to know how unused visanumbers suppose to work as per the law, visit this site.

http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2659&highlight=century

Well...I read through the whole thing....
Let me try to say this nicely..I tend to think that.There is some misinterpretation on your part of his comments...
When he said 'EB3 India has stolen EB3_ROW number in previous years' ...
He was representing another view point...It is not his own view point....
He is just presenting a neutral observers view point....
As much I have understood Mr. Nations is non partisan...He is already out of this mess and he is doing social service .
But we should listen to all view points....if we need to make a viable case....

msp1976
02-04-2007, 02:26 PM
that's right the actual law had two words that could change the actual meaning of how they are supposed to do it (ie., vertical versus horizontal). Some people (i was one of them) thought that at such a stalemate in the words that coomon sense should prevail. Common sense would dictate that skill would prevail over diversity.

However; the rules were always such that there was never any horizontal spillover but rather vertical. The main thing that changed was that the unused visas from row could be used by retrogressed countries quarterly rather then annually.
That is why USCIS never published the regulations for AC21...They are sure as hell that their ass is gonna get sued...whatever regulations they propose... Now it is a miracle that no one has sued them....May be they are waiting for someone to sue them....

tdasara
02-04-2007, 02:27 PM
Who can sue them? A non-US citizen?

An organization?

A US Citizen can ask for a PIL??

alisa
02-04-2007, 02:29 PM
Ofcourse, with all due respect, I beg to differ, in that I think that diversity should prevail over skill.
From my point of view, that would be common sense. :)


that's right the actual law had two words that could change the actual meaning of how they are supposed to do it (ie., vertical versus horizontal). Some people (i was one of them) thought that at such a stalemate in the words that coomon sense should prevail. Common sense would dictate that skill would prevail over diversity.

However; the rules were always such that there was never any horizontal spillover but rather vertical. The main thing that changed was that the unused visas from row could be used by retrogressed countries quarterly rather then annually.

rnanchal
02-04-2007, 02:32 PM
Alisa,

what should prevail is a matter of perspective. If you are an Indian then skill should prevail, if you are not, then of course it is the other way around

msp1976
02-04-2007, 02:34 PM
Of course he is very informative, however he is very biased and having wrong openion that EB3 India has stolen EB3_ROW number in previous years as he belongs to ROW. He wrongly assumes that till EB3-ROW becomes current EB2 & EB3-India will not see any movement. He thinks no one knows the rules, laws ect..and he is only one knows everything. The actual fact is most peoples have been doing research on retrogression like him last two years and not having enough time to reply his post. To fuel his openion DOS is violating the section 202 of INA and no one cares about this including IV core team.

If you want to know true color of Unitednation visit this site.

http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=225197&page=3&pp=15&highlight=outlook

If you want to know how unused visanumbers suppose to work as per the law, visit this site.

http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2659&highlight=century



Dear longq....

You should consider gathering a few more EB2 India guys and have a crack at suing USCIS for violating the law...Unfortunately I am EB3 India and this suing does not help me...
You can ask for GCs for all members of your law suits...But USCIS would fight you hard for sure...
IV is collective organization...IV's solution would be to get numbers increased for everyone...Otherwise we would again have a fight bet EB2 and EB3 link the one we had between guys who want the 485 without PD and those who oppose it...

msp1976
02-04-2007, 02:38 PM
Alisa,

what should prevail is a matter of perspective. If you are an Indian then skill should prevail, if you are not, then of course it is the other way around

OK guys...Let's not start on another track now...
We are asking for more numbers so that every category would be current...

Remember ... In a group we would have a greater chance....We have to stay together out of common self interest....

msp1976
02-04-2007, 02:40 PM
Who can sue them? A non-US citizen?

An organization?

A US Citizen can ask for a PIL??

I believe that even non-citizens can sue USCIS through an attorney...

Anyone says otherwise ???

alisa
02-04-2007, 02:44 PM
I totally agree with you my friend.

I came across this website last year in November. I got active in December, and contributed, and tried to get active in my state chapter.

When I come across posts that want to remove country caps, or some other measure that is going to be harmful to me, I have to stop and ask myself if I am shooting myself in the foot by supporting IV.

Its not about whats fair. Nor about what common sense is. Its about self-interest.

If we are increasing the size of the pie, then it benefits me (ROW) to be here. If we are to fight each other over crumbs, then it doesn't.



Alisa,

what should prevail is a matter of perspective. If you are an Indian then skill should prevail, if you are not, then of course it is the other way around

msp1976
02-04-2007, 02:53 PM
I totally agree with you my friend.

I came across this website last year in November. I got active in December, and contributed, and tried to get active in my state chapter.

When I come across posts that want to remove country caps, or some other measure that is going to be harmful to me, I have to stop and ask myself if I am shooting myself in the foot by supporting IV.

Its not about whats fair. Nor about what common sense is. Its about self-interest.

If we are increasing the size of the pie, then it benefits me (ROW) to be here. If we are to fight each other over crumbs, then it doesn't.

Yes...The orgnization is about increasing the total pie and the overflow to India/china happens only after the ROW needs are complete...So your interests are taken care of...

rnanchal
02-04-2007, 02:54 PM
I did not pass judgement about what is right or wrong, just stated a fact. Dont get riled up. My intention was not to point fingers

rnanchal
02-04-2007, 03:01 PM
Anyway fair and common sense are words that do not exist in USCIS dictionaries. Belief, faith and supporting IV is perspective too. All these entities do not last without results

alisa
02-04-2007, 03:12 PM
I'll take that as the final word on this issue.

And I expect people here to have enough integrity to let us (ROW) know if they intend to pursue the interests of the oversubscribed countries only, at the expense of the interests of the ROW.

Yes...The orgnization is about increasing the total pie and the overflow to India/china happens only after the ROW needs are complete...So your interests are taken care of...

tdasara
02-04-2007, 03:16 PM
Alisa

All we are doing is speculating!

rnanchal
02-04-2007, 03:21 PM
You have hit the nail on the head. Speculate is all one can do. Relief will come when the politicians here want it to. When it suits their needs and interests, not before. They know exactly what everyone's plight is. They play dumb to suit their own agendas

longq
02-04-2007, 07:28 PM
I'll take that as the final word on this issue.

And I expect people here to have enough integrity to let us (ROW) know if they intend to pursue the interests of the oversubscribed countries only, at the expense of the interests of the ROW.

No one here takes advantage of any group. We are talking here is what law says and how it is implemented by various agencies. The problem is there is doubt that DOS has not understood the law. No one is against ROW and loves India and China. US immigration simply based on preference catagories. For example, wife of U.S citzen will be given first preference in immigration (FB1) compare to brothers and sisters of US permanent residents (FB4or5). This is the law.

Similar thing in employment catagories too. Before 2000, there is a verical spill over of EB visas. Becase of this, a high skilled workers from India/China has to wait more compare to low skilled workers from ROW. This practice will not put US in technological edge. Thats why AC21 law implemented.

After 2000, congress removed country quota in all EB catagoires. The simple reason is to make US competiveness in 21st century. The intend is simple.

The simple meaning of AC21 law is, for example, let us assume following hypothitical situation. There are 40,000 noble prize winners from Mexico. All of them applying EB1 visas in a FY. In same FY, no one from other countries applied EB1 visa. As per AC21 rule, entire 40,000 visas (100%) goes to Mexico in EB1 irrsepective of how EB2 or EB3 or FE catagories are retrogressed or howmany mexians in EB/FB are waiting. This is what congress intend to promote high skilled immigrants to USA. This is what american competivness in 21 century. The intent here is noble prize winners should not wait even if they are from oversubscribed countries like mexico.

If you read word by word of AC21 rule ..you will understand what I am saying.

INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter

My intension is simple.

Even if SKIL/CIR bill passed in near future, if DOS or USCIS does not implement the law accordingly, it will be disaster for oversubscribed countries like India and China.

tdasara
02-04-2007, 07:43 PM
I think Rajiv Khanna once sued INS to make sure the I485's are approved 'First In & First Out' basis.

I am not sure if we can approach him again and how.

This is just to get to know how USCIS is allocating the visas. How USCIS is interpreting the law?

rnanchal
02-04-2007, 07:53 PM
As I alluded to earlier. Specualtion is all one can indulge in. Everyone know what our plight is. Politicians and USCIS act dumb to suit and advance their own needs and agendas. Things will start moving only when the politicians decide it suits their needs

tdasara
02-04-2007, 08:03 PM
I think the court acknowledge Mr.Khanna's plea as 'noble' but little could be done because of bearaucracy and unknowns!

But we here are asking for the numbers (which USCIS should have) and the details of the process USCIS is already following.

Again it has to come from a citizen.

alisa
02-04-2007, 09:03 PM
Look.

I would have to be an absolute moron to contribute to IV, and to work for it, if at the end it costs me more in getting a green card.

So, either you think that IV-ers from ROW are morons. Or you want them to quit, and turn this organization into an Indians-only group.

Its as simple as that. You can quote all the laws in the universe, and come up with all the fancy logic that you want. But what I have said above is what it all boils down to.

No one here takes advantage of any group. We are talking here is what law says and how it is implemented by various agencies. The problem is there is doubt that DOS has not understood the law. No one is against ROW and loves India and China. US immigration simply based on preference catagories. For example, wife of U.S citzen will be given first preference in immigration (FB1) compare to brothers and sisters of US permanent residents (FB4or5). This is the law.

Similar thing in employment catagories too. Before 2000, there is a verical spill over of EB visas. Becase of this, a high skilled workers from India/China has to wait more compare to low skilled workers from ROW. This practice will not put US in technological edge. Thats why AC21 law implemented.

After 2000, congress removed country quota in all EB catagoires. The simple reason is to make US competiveness in 21st century. The intend is simple.

The simple meaning of AC21 law is, for example, let us assume following hypothitical situation. There are 40,000 noble prize winners from Mexico. All of them applying EB1 visas in a FY. In same FY, no one from other countries applied EB1 visa. As per AC21 rule, entire 40,000 visas (100%) goes to Mexico in EB1 irrsepective of how EB2 or EB3 or FE catagories are retrogressed or howmany mexians in EB/FB are waiting. This is what congress intend to promote high skilled immigrants to USA. This is what american competivness in 21 century. The intent here is noble prize winners should not wait even if they are from oversubscribed countries like mexico.

If you read word by word of AC21 rule ..you will understand what I am saying.

INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter

My intension is simple.

Even if SKIL/CIR bill passed in near future, if DOS or USCIS does not implement the law accordingly, it will be disaster for oversubscribed countries like India and China.

msp1976
02-04-2007, 10:50 PM
No one here takes advantage of any group. We are talking here is what law says and how it is implemented by various agencies. The problem is there is doubt that DOS has not understood the law. No one is against ROW and loves India and China. US immigration simply based on preference catagories. For example, wife of U.S citzen will be given first preference in immigration (FB1) compare to brothers and sisters of US permanent residents (FB4or5). This is the law.

Similar thing in employment catagories too. Before 2000, there is a verical spill over of EB visas. Becase of this, a high skilled workers from India/China has to wait more compare to low skilled workers from ROW. This practice will not put US in technological edge. Thats why AC21 law implemented.

After 2000, congress removed country quota in all EB catagoires. The simple reason is to make US competiveness in 21st century. The intend is simple.

The simple meaning of AC21 law is, for example, let us assume following hypothitical situation. There are 40,000 noble prize winners from Mexico. All of them applying EB1 visas in a FY. In same FY, no one from other countries applied EB1 visa. As per AC21 rule, entire 40,000 visas (100%) goes to Mexico in EB1 irrsepective of how EB2 or EB3 or FE catagories are retrogressed or howmany mexians in EB/FB are waiting. This is what congress intend to promote high skilled immigrants to USA. This is what american competivness in 21 century. The intent here is noble prize winners should not wait even if they are from oversubscribed countries like mexico.

If you read word by word of AC21 rule ..you will understand what I am saying.

INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter

My intension is simple.

Even if SKIL/CIR bill passed in near future, if DOS or USCIS does not implement the law accordingly, it will be disaster for oversubscribed countries like India and China.

You see ...even in this text congress did not explicitly write that the 7% country limit does not apply to the EB immigration.They did not remove the limits as you claim...Unless and until they write that the 7% limit does not apply...all your logic remains on paper and not in practice...

The acceptable solution to all so that all of us get something is as Alisa says...'increase the total numbers'......Then all categories become current...
At least you would get to file 485 and spouses can work...
Otherwise we would just keep fighting among ourselves and get no where.....

Choices are simple...1. co operate with each other build a group, have a common minimum goal and get something ...
2. do not cooperate with each other and get stuck in the same thing forever...


Moderators...

Read the last 2/3 pages including this one and you would know the reasons why you have a large non-contributing member base....

longq
02-04-2007, 11:22 PM
Look.

I would have to be an absolute moron to contribute to IV, and to work for it, if at the end it costs me more in getting a green card.

So, either you think that IV-ers from ROW are morons. Or you want them to quit, and turn this organization into an Indians-only group.

Its as simple as that. You can quote all the laws in the universe, and come up with all the fancy logic that you want. But what I have said above is what it all boils down to.

I do not care whether you contribute to IV or not. What I am writing here is law or facts and how it is affecting oversubscribed countries becuse of wrong interpretation of law. I am not here to unite or divide any group. In my level, I am contributing to end retrogression by sending mails to law makers. Even any law passes to remove retro, this misinterpretation of law is screwing Indians and Chinese. A EB2 person from Iran/Iraq/Pakistan with PD 2007 can get GC with in 6 months (right from PERM labor to 485 approval) why should Indian with PD in 2003 has to wait for ever?

My employer hired me not based on citizenship. They hired me based on their requirement for the job and my skills. They do not care, if I am male or female or Indian or Chinese or Iranian or Iraqi or Pakistani or European. I am penalized for just I am Indian not able to adjust LPR even I have priority date in 2003 after a long wait for Labor certification and 140 approvals. However, if I am from other than India and China I would have got GC with in six months even if my PD in late 2006. If a person with a Priority Date 2007 can become LPR immediately in EB2 category even if he is from a state sponsoring terrorism (provided if his background check is cleared). However a person from India having priority date in 2003 can not become LPR and sitting in dark to hope to see the light at the end of tunnel. How fare it is? Is it not the discrimination by country of birth?

longq
02-04-2007, 11:32 PM
[QUOTE=msp1976]You see ...even in this text.They did not remove the limits as you claim...Unless and until they write that the 7% limit does not apply...all your logic remains on paper and not in practice...QUOTE]

Please try to read law carefully. The law will not have simple terms as you think. They have to draft the law in the language of the act. Any way the meaning is same.

The law explicitly say that the 7% country limit does not apply to the EB1, EB2, EB3, EB4, EB5 catagories, if excess visas available in those catagories.

invincibleasian
02-04-2007, 11:38 PM
No use fighting. Only the law makers can resolve this issue and they will not listen to us and pursue their own political interests.

alisa
02-04-2007, 11:48 PM
Man,

I'll just shut up after this post now. You are obviously incapable of understanding my argument.

I'll continue to assume that IV is working for the interests of all EB based applicants, and not just those belonging to one particular country, especially at the expense of EB3-ROW. And I am pretty confident that the core and the majority of the members of this forum have enough integrity to let people like me know I am mistaken in this belief.



I do not care whether you contribute to IV or not. What I am writing here is law or facts and how it is affecting oversubscribed countries becuse of wrong interpretation of law. I am not here to unite or divide any group. In my level, I am contributing to end retrogression by sending mails to law makers. Even any law passes to remove retro, this misinterpretation of law is screwing Indians and Chinese. A EB2 person from Iran/Iraq/Pakistan with PD 2007 can get GC with in 6 months (right from PERM labor to 485 approval) why should Indian with PD in 2003 has to wait for ever?

My employer hired me not based on citizenship. They hired me based on their requirement for the job and my skills. They do not care, if I am male or female or Indian or Chinese or Iranian or Iraqi or Pakistani or European. I am penalized for just I am Indian not able to adjust LPR even I have priority date in 2003 after a long wait for Labor certification and 140 approvals. However, if I am from other than India and China I would have got GC with in six months even if my PD in late 2006. If a person with a Priority Date 2007 can become LPR immediately in EB2 category even if he is from a state sponsoring terrorism (provided if his background check is cleared). However a person from India having priority date in 2003 can not become LPR and sitting in dark to hope to see the light at the end of tunnel. How fare it is? Is it not the discrimination by country of birth?

unitednations
02-05-2007, 12:01 AM
No one here takes advantage of any group. We are talking here is what law says and how it is implemented by various agencies. The problem is there is doubt that DOS has not understood the law. No one is against ROW and loves India and China. US immigration simply based on preference catagories. For example, wife of U.S citzen will be given first preference in immigration (FB1) compare to brothers and sisters of US permanent residents (FB4or5). This is the law.

Similar thing in employment catagories too. Before 2000, there is a verical spill over of EB visas. Becase of this, a high skilled workers from India/China has to wait more compare to low skilled workers from ROW. This practice will not put US in technological edge. Thats why AC21 law implemented.

After 2000, congress removed country quota in all EB catagoires. The simple reason is to make US competiveness in 21st century. The intend is simple.

The simple meaning of AC21 law is, for example, let us assume following hypothitical situation. There are 40,000 noble prize winners from Mexico. All of them applying EB1 visas in a FY. In same FY, no one from other countries applied EB1 visa. As per AC21 rule, entire 40,000 visas (100%) goes to Mexico in EB1 irrsepective of how EB2 or EB3 or FE catagories are retrogressed or howmany mexians in EB/FB are waiting. This is what congress intend to promote high skilled immigrants to USA. This is what american competivness in 21 century. The intent here is noble prize winners should not wait even if they are from oversubscribed countries like mexico.

If you read word by word of AC21 rule ..you will understand what I am saying.

INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter

My intension is simple.

Even if SKIL/CIR bill passed in near future, if DOS or USCIS does not implement the law accordingly, it will be disaster for oversubscribed countries like India and China.



How do you come to these conclusions what congress intended. AC21's main provisions were to recapture unused visas for certain years; extend h-1b beyond six years; allow someone to change a job after 485 pending for more then six months; allow unused visas to be allocated to oversubscribed countries on a quarterly basis rather then in the fourth quarter.

Above is what was changed. There was no lifting of country cap. If you go to the earlies visa bulletins listed; you will see that Dominican Republic at one time was retrogressed. I haven't looked at it in a long time but if someone goes to the historical visa bulletins pre ac21 then you may see significant movement in retrogressed countries in the fourth quarter of uscis fiscal year (july to september). This is what changed.

However, the ac21 part about unused visas only stipulated if in any quarter there were less applicants then visas available then spillover can happen in that quarter. However, as can be seen in 2005 that weasn't the case and there shouldn't have been spillover.

In another posting you mentioned that your employer doesn't care whether you are Indian or chines or pakistani or anything else. This is true they want you for your skill. However, how did you get into USA. Chinese generally go to school here and will work wherever they get a job. However, Indian nationals have designed a system to get their realitves here through h-1b. Selective recrutiing is performed to get fellow compatriates here that couldn't otherwise get here becuase they have no connections. I ask some of my clients how they get employees. They tell me they are sponsoring their classmates, their cousins, etc. for h-1b.

Therefore, you may think it is not fair; and perhaps it is not fair but perhaps government knows that certain systems have been designed and they value diversity.

In business definition a skilled worker is not someone with two years of experience, a bachelors or even a masters. A skilled worker is someone with substantial experience. That is 15 years and makes $200K to $300K. Employment base immigration is just an accomodation to allow a certain number of people into USA. In my mind it is just an accomodation or goodwill.

If the EB system was designd to attract the best and brightest minds; skilled worker definition or eb2 or eb3 definition would have a much different meaning and would follow business rather then USCIS definition. It would be much different. There would be no quota. It would follow normal business practicses. That is we, can't find a us citizen or greencard holder and we need you. In real business sens it would be an offer, acceptance and you would start in a couple of months. However, it doesn't follow normal business rules/practices because maybe the powers that be look at it as just an accomodation rather then a real necessity.

longq
02-05-2007, 12:16 AM
How do you come to these conclusions what congress intended. AC21's main provisions were to recapture unused visas for certain years; extend h-1b beyond six years; allow someone to change a job after 485 pending for more then six months; allow unused visas to be allocated to oversubscribed countries on a quarterly basis rather then in the fourth quarter.

I came to the conclusion just based on section INA 202 (a) (5) (A). Nothing more nothing less. You came to funny conclusion of "quaterly basis".
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.

You are critizising H1B indians and their employer screwing the system which is not relevent to what we are talking here. If you feel so, then attack who ever spoiling the system and regulate those. Instead you are trying to justify your interperataion is right and what DOS is doing is right. I will be the happiest person if they ban labor subsitution and ban desi consulting companies or H1B dependent employer participating in GC sponsering. Then this mess might have not happened.

qvadis
02-05-2007, 12:26 AM
Hi longq,

Not sure why you are still fighting this. I am sure law-makers are aware of the way USCIS implements the law and they don't seem to have any objections.

From the 2006 "CRS Report for Congress" on "U.S. Immigration Policy on Permanent Admissions"

Prior to FY2001, employment-based preference immigrants were also held to percountry ceilings. The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-313) enabled the per-country ceilings for employment-based immigrants to be surpassed for individual countries that are oversubscribed as long as visas are available within the worldwide limit for employment-based preferences.

It might actually be counterproductive as you might inflect negative sentiments against increasing overall EB-immigration level demanding improportional increase for 'top immigrant-sending countries'.


As the State Department describes, the per-country level “is not an entitlement but a barrier against monopolization.”



Please try to read law carefully. The law will not have simple terms as you think. They have to draft the law in the language of the act. Any way the meaning is same.

The law explicitly say that the 7% country limit does not apply to the EB1, EB2, EB3, EB4, EB5 catagories, if excess visas available in those catagories.

Exactly, but because EB3 is oversubscribed, no 'excess visas' are available for oversubscribed countries. (But we had this discussion before, though).

unitednations
02-05-2007, 12:53 AM
I came to the conclusion just based on section INA 202 (a) (5) (A). Nothing more nothing less. You came to funny conclusion of "quaterly basis".
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.

You are critizising H1B indians and their employer screwing the system which is not relevent to what we are talking here. If you feel so, then attack who ever spoiling the system and regulate those. Instead you are trying to justify your interperataion is right and what DOS is doing is right. I will be the happiest person if they ban labor subsitution and ban desi consulting companies or H1B dependent employer participating in GC sponsering. Then this mess might have not happened.

Because this discussion has happened so much. That is this exact discussion when everyone was trying to determine whether they should go for eb2 or eb3; the common prevailing attitude was horiziontal rather then vertical.

What made everyone shut up including me was what was written in november 2005 visa bulletin. It was there for everyone to see how it was going to be interpreted. Anothe law firm had reported chines usage year to date and it was concluded that they may fall short of the 11,000 visas (ie., 7% cap). With all this available; not one lawyer has decided to sue department of state or uscis over this. Why is that? Maybe what they are saying is correct and you are reading into it what you want to read into it.

Any time someone gets around to explaining the system; they are automatically branded anti-indian. Funny but everyone I know through immigration is Indian. Therefore, whenever someone brands me anti indian or even comes close to it; I get a very good chuckle out of it and so do the people who know me that frequent these boards and immigration.com

How the visas are being allocated actually is pretty relevant because it helps everyone to understand how it all works and comes together. I had been on the record that maybe people shouldn't get too worked up about this. The louder one becomes the more scrutiny starts happening. Once the scrutiny gets wratched up a few notches; are you ready to counter it.

What is this scrutiny that you may ask?

Newspaper in Maine did very thorough investigation of companies who sponsored labors through Maine. It was very hard hitting whcih asked for comments from Department of labor and USCIS. Both are investigating it. Essentially it said that companies rented out a cube and filed 60 labors and 100 h-1b's when their real offices were in other states that were taking a long time to get labors approved.

Backlog reduction centers are challenging companies to prove that their headquarters were where they said they were? They are questioning whether there is a permanent job. Companies are not responding and letting the labors go. Don't you think department of labor will start going into the approved labors and start scrutinizing them.

California service center denied many cases for two companies that I know of who had revenues of over $20 million. Reason for denial was that they are temp. agency and no permanent job. No permanent job; no I-140 approval. Companies have gotten a good dose of H-1b RFE's from california service center regarding this. Many have gotten the h-1b's denied because they can't even substantitate they have a job for the person. If they don't have a temp. job then how can they have a permanent job. Chennai consulate is giving very difficult time to staffing/consulates. It has gotten so bad that back in early december; consulates in india said if you are good in english you can go to ther consulaes in india. Guess what? Chennai it only takes two days to get an interview now because everyone refuses to go there. Just a matter of time before new delhi and mumbai catch up. if consulates are refusing visa stamping for temp. jobs what do you think will happen when they start ratcheting it up a notch to the permanent jobs.

Main reason they haven't gotten into the permanent jobs yet is because nurses which are really in demand also get greencards through staffing companies and are outsourced. Since, nurses are needed; uscis doesn't want to give a hard time to the staffing agencies; therefore, they don't want to be accused of double standards. We will see how this will change if at all as retrogression and increasing visas and studies are performed how people are getting greencards come to light.

btw; I have been on record that as long as country cap of 7% is maintained; it would have disasterous consequences for India/China to allow 485 filing without priority date. Since the 7% cap applies then that means someone who enters usa today from ROW and files an eb2 labor will get priority over you. Anyone can file a 485 as long as they have a labor, 140 and they are in non immigrant status. I know of three people through other forum who were from ROW; came on visitor visa found someone to file perm labor get approved in a couple of weeks and then go straight to 140/485. Since they can file 485 right away they get precedence over india/china. Anyone on visitor visa would be eligible. This would number in the millions. It would be quite possible that there would be never ending retrogression for India and China.

brb2
02-05-2007, 12:58 AM
Having diversity AND country quota for skilled employment is affirmative action gone waco. EB skilled immigration is to allow businesses to hire foreign labor for jobs they can't find American Citizens. Now to restrict businesses to discriminate based on the country of birth is just riduculous. Next do Universities apply affirmative action to their international student recruitement?

Indians and Chinese make up the largest group of international students in Engineering and Science. US citizens make up less than 50% of those graduating in Science and Engineering in Master's and PhD programs. Now businesses should not be penalized if they can't fill their highly skilled jobs with Iranians and Tongans and any other ROW countries.

We have a diversity lottery for nationals of those countries who would not make it out on merit and need a leg up. There may be a few Indian consulting companies who favor Indians, but they are the people who pay wages and know best. Similarly just because Americans prefer to buy Japanese cars we can't create an "affirmative action" and prevent americans from buying Japanese cars. We can't prevent walmart from stocking chinese products. So why force employers not to hire Indians and Chinese through creating quotas for highly skilled jobs?

No meaningful immigration reforms can be achieved as long as skilled immigration is based on country quotas. Next we know there will be quotas for marrying foreigners to add to diversity. If you marry a mexican there is retrogression but if you marry a citizen of Vanuatu then green card is processed in ROW:)

I was just making my point how ridiculous it is to have quotas for skilled immigration but not for others including asylum cases.


How do you come to these conclusions what congress intended. AC21's main provisions were to recapture unused visas for certain years; extend h-1b beyond six years; allow someone to change a job after 485 pending for more then six months; allow unused visas to be allocated to oversubscribed countries on a quarterly basis rather then in the fourth quarter.

Above is what was changed. There was no lifting of country cap. If you go to the earlies visa bulletins listed; you will see that Dominican Republic at one time was retrogressed. I haven't looked at it in a long time but if someone goes to the historical visa bulletins pre ac21 then you may see significant movement in retrogressed countries in the fourth quarter of uscis fiscal year (july to september). This is what changed.

However, the ac21 part about unused visas only stipulated if in any quarter there were less applicants then visas available then spillover can happen in that quarter. However, as can be seen in 2005 that weasn't the case and there shouldn't have been spillover.

In another posting you mentioned that your employer doesn't care whether you are Indian or chines or pakistani or anything else. This is true they want you for your skill. However, how did you get into USA. Chinese generally go to school here and will work wherever they get a job. However, Indian nationals have designed a system to get their realitves here through h-1b. Selective recrutiing is performed to get fellow compatriates here that couldn't otherwise get here becuase they have no connections. I ask some of my clients how they get employees. They tell me they are sponsoring their classmates, their cousins, etc. for h-1b.

Therefore, you may think it is not fair; and perhaps it is not fair but perhaps government knows that certain systems have been designed and they value diversity.

In business definition a skilled worker is not someone with two years of experience, a bachelors or even a masters. A skilled worker is someone with substantial experience. That is 15 years and makes $200K to $300K. Employment base immigration is just an accomodation to allow a certain number of people into USA. In my mind it is just an accomodation or goodwill.

If the EB system was designd to attract the best and brightest minds; skilled worker definition or eb2 or eb3 definition would have a much different meaning and would follow business rather then USCIS definition. It would be much different. There would be no quota. It would follow normal business practicses. That is we, can't find a us citizen or greencard holder and we need you. In real business sens it would be an offer, acceptance and you would start in a couple of months. However, it doesn't follow normal business rules/practices because maybe the powers that be look at it as just an accomodation rather then a real necessity.

unitednations
02-05-2007, 01:04 AM
Having diversity AND country quota for skilled employment is affirmative action gone waco. EB skilled immigration is to allow businesses to hire foreign labor for jobs they can't find American Citizens. Now to restrict businesses to discriminate based on the country of birth is just riduculous. Next do Universities apply affirmative action to their international student recruitement?

Indians and Chinese make up the largest group of international students in Engineering and Science. US citizens make up less than 50% of those graduating in Science and Engineering in Master's and PhD programs. Now businesses should not be penalized if they can't fill their highly skilled jobs with Iranians and Tongans and any other ROW countries.

We have a diversity lottery for nationals of those countries who would not make it out on merit and need a leg up. There may be a few Indian consulting companies who favor Indians, but they are the people who pay wages and know best. Similarly just because Americans prefer to buy Japanese cars we can't create an "affirmative action" and prevent americans from buying Japanese cars. We can't prevent walmart from stocking chinese products. So why force employers not to hire Indians and Chinese through creating quotas for highly skilled jobs?

No meaningful immigration reforms can be achieved as long as skilled immigration is based on country quotas. Next we know there will be quotas for marrying foreigners to add to diversity. If you marry a mexican there is retrogression but if you marry a citizen of Vanuatu then green card is processed in ROW:)

I was just making my point how ridiculous it is to have quotas for skilled immigration but not for others including asylum cases.

I'm not saying it is right. I think there should be no quotas; diversity or otherwise. It should follow normal business practices. Can't find american, we need you now you start working. This is how it works in everyday business.

However; we need to understand why doesn't immigration follow normal business practices. is it that we place more value on our contributions then what the country does. Is EB just another route to get people here like family, asylum, refugees, etc?

Although it may sound ridiculous but why is everyone want to put any limits to it. If proper controls can be put in place that there are genuine jobs and candidates are genuine then there shouldn't be any limits. How come no one wants to go for this solution. It actually makes more sense then just increasing the quota or not including dependents, etc.

msp1976
02-05-2007, 08:02 AM
Although it may sound ridiculous but why is everyone want to put any limits to it. If proper controls can be put in place that there are genuine jobs and candidates are genuine then there shouldn't be any limits. How come no one wants to go for this solution. It actually makes more sense then just increasing the quota or not including dependents, etc.

No cap would be the best solution... but that is very tough to sell in Washington....That's why all this complications of asking to take dependents out of the cap and allowing overflow to go to China/India...

As I understand, IV already made these arguments to senators and even the senators who are sympathetic to immigration are not willing to remove the cap..The only thing they would accept is that the overflow would go to India/China/oversubscribed countries....I wonder if one of the core members would comment on this.....You do not need to name names....Just a request give a description of your interactions with law makers in this regard...That would put this issue to rest.....


theortically what longg says is correct.The system is not fair......but not many are listening to us at this point...So we have to find some way out of the situation.....


We need both alisa and longg as members because we need more to get traction in Washington.....the only common solution for these would be to get the numbers increased somehow....Otherwise EB3-EB3-India-China-ROW keep fighting each other...you would have nothing....

andy garcia
02-05-2007, 09:19 AM
No cap would be the best solution... but that is very tough to sell in Washington....That's why all this complications of asking to take dependents out of the cap and allowing overflow to go to China/India...

As I understand, IV already made these arguments to senators and even the senators who are sympathetic to immigration are not willing to remove the cap..The only thing they would accept is that the overflow would go to India/China/oversubscribed countries....I wonder if one of the core members would comment on this.....You do not need to name names....Just a request give a description of your interactions with law makers in this regard...That would put this issue to rest.....


theortically what longg says is correct.The system is not fair......but not many are listening to us at this point...So we have to find some way out of the situation.....


We need both alisa and longg as members because we need more to get traction in Washington.....the only common solution for these would be to get the numbers increased somehow....Otherwise EB3-EB3-India-China-ROW keep fighting each other...you would have nothing....

If the DOS says this is because this what the law establishes:

"The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.

How do you like if people from a certain country go to India to take all your jobs?

waitingGC
02-05-2007, 09:27 AM
are we fighting over an unexistent pie? There is not even a small pie for us while we are discussing how to divide it.

hianupam
02-05-2007, 09:28 AM
If the DOS says this is because this what the law establishes:

"The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.

How do you like if people from a certain country go to India to take all your jobs?

The catch is that you will first have to establish that you can't find an Indian to do that job. A very very hard task I would assume!

chanduv23
02-05-2007, 10:13 AM
How do you come to these conclusions what congress intended. AC21's main provisions were to recapture unused visas for certain years; extend h-1b beyond six years; allow someone to change a job after 485 pending for more then six months; allow unused visas to be allocated to oversubscribed countries on a quarterly basis rather then in the fourth quarter.

Above is what was changed. There was no lifting of country cap. If you go to the earlies visa bulletins listed; you will see that Dominican Republic at one time was retrogressed. I haven't looked at it in a long time but if someone goes to the historical visa bulletins pre ac21 then you may see significant movement in retrogressed countries in the fourth quarter of uscis fiscal year (july to september). This is what changed.

However, the ac21 part about unused visas only stipulated if in any quarter there were less applicants then visas available then spillover can happen in that quarter. However, as can be seen in 2005 that weasn't the case and there shouldn't have been spillover.

In another posting you mentioned that your employer doesn't care whether you are Indian or chines or pakistani or anything else. This is true they want you for your skill. However, how did you get into USA. Chinese generally go to school here and will work wherever they get a job. However, Indian nationals have designed a system to get their realitves here through h-1b. Selective recrutiing is performed to get fellow compatriates here that couldn't otherwise get here becuase they have no connections. I ask some of my clients how they get employees. They tell me they are sponsoring their classmates, their cousins, etc. for h-1b.

Therefore, you may think it is not fair; and perhaps it is not fair but perhaps government knows that certain systems have been designed and they value diversity.

In business definition a skilled worker is not someone with two years of experience, a bachelors or even a masters. A skilled worker is someone with substantial experience. That is 15 years and makes $200K to $300K. Employment base immigration is just an accomodation to allow a certain number of people into USA. In my mind it is just an accomodation or goodwill.

If the EB system was designd to attract the best and brightest minds; skilled worker definition or eb2 or eb3 definition would have a much different meaning and would follow business rather then USCIS definition. It would be much different. There would be no quota. It would follow normal business practicses. That is we, can't find a us citizen or greencard holder and we need you. In real business sens it would be an offer, acceptance and you would start in a couple of months. However, it doesn't follow normal business rules/practices because maybe the powers that be look at it as just an accomodation rather then a real necessity.

While what you say is from a very neutral perspective as you see things from the other side of the wall, it may not be 100% true in what you think it is. These agencies or companies are a creation of the system, tons of people come from India to fill job positions and systems have been designed to accommodate that. Companies like Wipro, Infosys, etc... have HR people stamp their own H1b visa and send people in a bunch to the consulate for verification.
Indian companies do not 'FAVOUR" Indian workers, but take advantage and try to "EXPLOIT" Indian workers to cater to businesses.
The way the system works is, there is always available pool of talent for American businessess, these happen with rules being framed to accmomdate skilled workers.
Just like how Jewish people good in Financial stuff, Indians have been immigrating in skilled worker category.

While from your perspective you seem to think that it is some sort of Mafia trying to break rules and taking law in its own hands, favouring thier countrymen, it is because you don't have such a big infrastructure in China or Philippines etc... it is again the same Indian companies that are opening up branches in Singapore, Malaysia, Shangai, etc.. and reqruiting people from there too. Chinese consulting companies are now operating in full fledged manner these days and there seem to be companies that cater to Chinese Canadians looking for jobs in USA by providing them a TN visa letter and bringing them to US and place them in Client locations.

unitednations
02-05-2007, 10:34 AM
While what you say is from a very neutral perspective as you see things from the other side of the wall, it may not be 100% true in what you think it is. These agencies or companies are a creation of the system, tons of people come from India to fill job positions and systems have been designed to accommodate that. Companies like Wipro, Infosys, etc... have HR people stamp their own H1b visa and send people in a bunch to the consulate for verification.
Indian companies do not 'FAVOUR" Indian workers, but take advantage and try to "EXPLOIT" Indian workers to cater to businesses.
The way the system works is, there is always available pool of talent for American businessess, these happen with rules being framed to accmomdate skilled workers.
Just like how Jewish people good in Financial stuff, Indians have been immigrating in skilled worker category.

While from your perspective you seem to think that it is some sort of Mafia trying to break rules and taking law in its own hands, favouring thier countrymen, it is because you don't have such a big infrastructure in China or Philippines etc... it is again the same Indian companies that are opening up branches in Singapore, Malaysia, Shangai, etc.. and reqruiting people from there too. Chinese consulting companies are now operating in full fledged manner these days and there seem to be companies that cater to Chinese Canadians looking for jobs in USA by providing them a TN visa letter and bringing them to US and place them in Client locations.


I have nothing against the staffing agencies whatsoever. I actually like the business model. The laws are generally being followed. There is nothing wrong with it. However, I do ask many of the companies why they only have indian or south asians. Especially if they have indians coming from Germany or Singapore, etc. Common answer I get is that other people have too much restriction. Expectation would be they would have their own corporate apartment, no bench time; selection of projects and no travel. As you know this is a little difficult to accomodate for these companies.

It generally is being clogged because it is getting around family base immigration. Although there is nothing wrong with that legally; it does hurt the people who cannot have the same accomodation. I know many, many people who have u.s. citizen brother; sponsors parents for greencards, rest of siblings come through staffing agency and then cousins get invited through h-1b and then spouse want to work and then another h-1b gets used. Eventully whole extended family base is here going through employment base when perhaps they should be going through family base. Other country people do not have such luxuries or companies looking to sponsor them specifically. Other country people generally went to school here and then went to h-1b and even then they have a difficult time getting it because they don't have the connection.

Because of all these workarounds; it is going to cause a lot of people to be here from just certain countries. I firmly believe that lawmakers, uscis know this pretty well (i've actually seen it in an i-140 denial where brother was ceo and sponsoring his brother for greencard) and this is why they don't want to lift country caps. They understand why the visas are being dominated. Pretty tough to get them to change this, if this is the way they feel.

chanduv23
02-05-2007, 11:58 AM
I have nothing against the staffing agencies whatsoever. I actually like the business model. The laws are generally being followed. There is nothing wrong with it. However, I do ask many of the companies why they only have indian or south asians. Especially if they have indians coming from Germany or Singapore, etc. Common answer I get is that other people have too much restriction. Expectation would be they would have their own corporate apartment, no bench time; selection of projects and no travel. As you know this is a little difficult to accomodate for these companies.

It generally is being clogged because it is getting around family base immigration. Although there is nothing wrong with that legally; it does hurt the people who cannot have the same accomodation. I know many, many people who have u.s. citizen brother; sponsors parents for greencards, rest of siblings come through staffing agency and then cousins get invited through h-1b and then spouse want to work and then another h-1b gets used. Eventully whole extended family base is here going through employment base when perhaps they should be going through family base. Other country people do not have such luxuries or companies looking to sponsor them specifically. Other country people generally went to school here and then went to h-1b and even then they have a difficult time getting it because they don't have the connection.

Because of all these workarounds; it is going to cause a lot of people to be here from just certain countries. I firmly believe that lawmakers, uscis know this pretty well (i've actually seen it in an i-140 denial where brother was ceo and sponsoring his brother for greencard) and this is why they don't want to lift country caps. They understand why the visas are being dominated. Pretty tough to get them to change this, if this is the way they feel.

Yes, I have heard of people using H1b visas to bring relatives etc.... which is not good, but a good system in place and strict enforcements will make sure someone is not misusing h1b visa. ie as long as employee is highly productive and gets good salary, it is fine, but if visa is beng used just as travel document, then it is an issue.

eb3_nepa
02-05-2007, 12:27 PM
Everyone in this forum knows that I am a complete moron: I did not even know ROW and Schedule A. So it does not make sense in paying attention to my advice. I still have the audacity to request everyone to pay more attention to the following.


Both sides have very valid points. A healthy debate on the topic is insightfull specially to morons like me. However, it is sad to see contributing members fighting over an issue that we may NOT have to resolve. I wish we had such a vigorous debate on generating contributions which will serve some purpose.

I agree Macaca. It never ceases to amaze me, how willing and ready everyone on here is to start a rousing argument over the smallest things instead of focussing on the main goal!