mhtanim
07-21 08:07 PM
In rare cases RFE has been issued. My doc also wrote that I need to follow-up with my PCP for INH treatment on my medical form. I visited my PCP and they sent me to a Infectious Disease specialist. The ID specialist said that there is no urgency for treatment although it is recommended to have the treatment. But said I can my take my own time to think if I need to go through the treatment.
Asked what if USCIS sends an RFE, the ID said that they usually do not ask for it for younger people but for someone over 50 , they may ask. In any case he said if I received any RFE he was willing to provide me a letter that INH treatment is not urgently needed.
You actually have active TB? Or you are saying your TB skin test came out positive as you had BCG?
If you had given BCG and your skin test came positive, that's very normal. If your doctor here wants to treat you because your skin test came positive although your chest x-ray is clear, then you probably should change your doctor.
Asked what if USCIS sends an RFE, the ID said that they usually do not ask for it for younger people but for someone over 50 , they may ask. In any case he said if I received any RFE he was willing to provide me a letter that INH treatment is not urgently needed.
You actually have active TB? Or you are saying your TB skin test came out positive as you had BCG?
If you had given BCG and your skin test came positive, that's very normal. If your doctor here wants to treat you because your skin test came positive although your chest x-ray is clear, then you probably should change your doctor.
wallpaper kate beckinsale van helsing
bluez25
10-28 07:26 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21572&highlight=leaving
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3305&page=2
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3305&page=2
neelu
01-02 01:04 PM
Hi everyone,
I am currently on a H4 Visa. The H4 visa on my passport expires on 20 June 2007. My husband recently got a 3 year extension on his H1 ( I 140 approved) and because of him, my H4 is also extended for 3 years (valid from 10/23/2006 to 08/07/2009 )
I intend to travel abroad in february 2007 to be back in the US by march 2007.
I have a few questions in this regard:
1. Can I travel on my current H4 visa which expires on 06/20/2007 or should I get a new H4 visa stamped with my 3 year extension before I travel?
2. If I travel on my current H4 visa , is there even a remote possibility of being stopped at Immigration because of my new extension?
3. Also if I decide to travel on my current H4 visa, since I only have 4-5 months left before it expires, will US immigration pose any problems when I re-enter in US?
I would greatly appreciate if you can respond to my questions.
Thank you very much in advance.
I am currently on a H4 Visa. The H4 visa on my passport expires on 20 June 2007. My husband recently got a 3 year extension on his H1 ( I 140 approved) and because of him, my H4 is also extended for 3 years (valid from 10/23/2006 to 08/07/2009 )
I intend to travel abroad in february 2007 to be back in the US by march 2007.
I have a few questions in this regard:
1. Can I travel on my current H4 visa which expires on 06/20/2007 or should I get a new H4 visa stamped with my 3 year extension before I travel?
2. If I travel on my current H4 visa , is there even a remote possibility of being stopped at Immigration because of my new extension?
3. Also if I decide to travel on my current H4 visa, since I only have 4-5 months left before it expires, will US immigration pose any problems when I re-enter in US?
I would greatly appreciate if you can respond to my questions.
Thank you very much in advance.
2011 kate beckinsale van helsing
reddymjm
12-04 04:52 PM
I am also flying to Chennai in 2 days.
more...
mhtanim
02-26 02:04 PM
This is correct as per my understanding. As soon as your GC is approved you will need AP to re-enter US. IO at POE will have the information about your approved GC. I do not think he will allow you to enter on H4 after the GC Approval.
This is just my understanding. Check with a attorney to get precise information.
No need for AP. If someone mails him the GC, he can get back to the U.S. with it.
This is just my understanding. Check with a attorney to get precise information.
No need for AP. If someone mails him the GC, he can get back to the U.S. with it.
mirage41
06-13 05:04 PM
Just a quick update:
All 3 Lofgren bills will be marked up next week in the subcommittee.
IV is working with the committee members at this time and will give more updates as the bills move forward. Please continue to make calls.
What does 'marked up' mean?
All 3 Lofgren bills will be marked up next week in the subcommittee.
IV is working with the committee members at this time and will give more updates as the bills move forward. Please continue to make calls.
What does 'marked up' mean?
more...
bfadlia
02-21 12:31 PM
your browser might be getting the old one from cashe
2010 kate beckinsale van helsing
meridiani.planum
05-18 12:56 PM
If this passes this will be awesome for Ph.D. graduates.
and also for non-PhD folks like me. As they exempt these superstars from the queue, it also has the effect of making the queue smaller (slightly atleast) for everyone else. i personalyl know of two PhDs who are waiting in EB2 queue for the last 3 years...
and also for non-PhD folks like me. As they exempt these superstars from the queue, it also has the effect of making the queue smaller (slightly atleast) for everyone else. i personalyl know of two PhDs who are waiting in EB2 queue for the last 3 years...
more...
.jpg "19 middot; kate beckinsale naked van helsing nipples")
madras1
01-27 12:38 PM
US needs EB1 and Ph.Ds
Others not contribute as much
Did you know your tri-valley university Ph.d does not count?
Others not contribute as much
Did you know your tri-valley university Ph.d does not count?
hair kate beckinsale hair silvia
sku
01-09 04:03 PM
Is this survey for only "those who lost a job while waiting for GC" or does it include anyone and everyone?
I think ?
Also I will add...Please add note who you are refering too who lost the job like family member, friend, co-worker Or someone else
I think ?
Also I will add...Please add note who you are refering too who lost the job like family member, friend, co-worker Or someone else
more...
waltz
08-24 02:05 PM
I'm sorry if this has been posted before, but the show is based on the following study:
************************************************
Kauffman Foundation Study Points to �Brain-Drain� of Skilled U.S. Immigrant Entrepreneurs to Home Country
Contacts:
Barbara Pruitt, 816-932-1288, bpruitt@kauffman.org, Kauffman Foundation
Tom Phillips, 212-935-4655, comptwp@aol.com, Communication Partners
More than a million skilled foreign nationals in the United States, including doctors and scientists, face mounting visa backlog
(KANSAS CITY, Mo.) Aug. 22, 2007 � More than one million skilled immigrant workers, including scientists, engineers, doctors and researchers and their families, are competing for 120,000 permanent U.S. resident visas each year, creating a sizeable imbalance likely to fuel a �reverse brain-drain� with skilled workers returning to their home country, according to a new report released today by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
The situation is even bleaker as the number of employment visas issued to immigrants from any single country is less than 10,000 per year with a wait time of several years.
�The United States benefits from having foreign-born innovators create their ideas in this country,� said Vivek Wadhwa, Wertheim fellow with the Harvard Law School and executive in residence at Duke University. �Their departures would be detrimental to U.S. economic well-being. And, when foreigners come to the United States, collaborate with Americans in developing and patenting new ideas, and employ those ideas in business in ways they could not readily do in their home countries, the world benefits.�
Conducted by researchers at Duke University, New York University and Harvard University, the study is the third in a series of studies focusing on immigrants� contributions to the competitiveness of the U.S. economy. Earlier research revealed a dramatic increase in the contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property over an eight-year period.
In this study, "Intellectual Property, the Immigration Backlog, and a Reverse Brain-Drain," researchers offer a more refined measure of this rise in contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property and seek to explain this increase with an analysis of the immigrant-visa backlog for skilled workers. The key finding from this research is that the number of skilled workers waiting for visas is significantly larger than the number that can be admitted to the United States. This imbalance creates the potential for a sizeable reverse brain-drain from the United States to the skilled workers� home countries.
The earlier studies, �America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs� and �Entrepreneurship, Education and Immigration: America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part II,� documented that one in four engineering and technology companies founded between 1995 and 2005 had an immigrant founder. Researchers found that these companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Indian immigrants founded more companies than the next four groups (from the United Kingdom, China, Taiwan and Japan) combined.
Furthermore, these companies� founders tended to be highly educated in science, technology, math and engineering-related disciplines, with 96 percent holding bachelor�s degrees and 75 percent holding master�s or PhD degrees.
Among key findings in the most recent report:
Foreign nationals residing in the United States were named as inventors or co-inventors in 25.6 percent of international patent applications filed from the United States in 2006. This represents an increase from 7.6 percent in 1998.
Foreign nationals contributed to more than half of the international patents filed by a number of large, multi-national companies, including Qualcomm (72 percent), Merck & Co. (65 percent), General Electric (64 percent), Siemens (63 percent) and Cisco (60 percent). Forty-one percent of the patents filed by the U.S. government had foreign nationals as inventors or co-inventors.
In 2006, 16.8 percent of international patent applications from the United States had an inventor or co-inventor with a Chinese-heritage name, representing an increase from 11.2 percent in 1998. The contribution of inventors with Indian-heritage names increased to 13.7 percent from 9.5 percent in the same period.
The total number of employment-based principals in the employment-based categories and their family members waiting for legal permanent residence in the United States in 2006 was estimated at 1,055,084. Additionally, there are an estimated 126,421 residents abroad also waiting for employment-based U.S. legal permanent residence, adding up to a worldwide total of 1,181,505.
Using data from the New Immigrant Survey, the authors find that, in 2003, approximately one in five new legal immigrants in the United States and about one in three employment-based new legal immigrants either planned to leave the United States or were uncertain about remaining. The authors had no data on how many foreign nationals have actually returned to their homelands.
�Given that the U.S. comparative advantage in the global economy is in creating knowledge and applying it to business, it behooves the country to consider how we might adjust policies to reduce the immigration backlog, encourage innovative foreign minds to remain in the country, and entice new innovators to come,� said Robert Litan, vice president of Research and Policy at the Kauffman Foundation.
About the research team
For more information about the Global Engineering and Entrepreneurship research at Duke University, visit http://www.globalizationresearch.com; visit http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/lwp/ to learn about Harvard Law�s Labor and Worklife Program; and visit http://www.nyu.edu/ for more information about New York University.
Read the report
************************************************
Kauffman Foundation Study Points to �Brain-Drain� of Skilled U.S. Immigrant Entrepreneurs to Home Country
Contacts:
Barbara Pruitt, 816-932-1288, bpruitt@kauffman.org, Kauffman Foundation
Tom Phillips, 212-935-4655, comptwp@aol.com, Communication Partners
More than a million skilled foreign nationals in the United States, including doctors and scientists, face mounting visa backlog
(KANSAS CITY, Mo.) Aug. 22, 2007 � More than one million skilled immigrant workers, including scientists, engineers, doctors and researchers and their families, are competing for 120,000 permanent U.S. resident visas each year, creating a sizeable imbalance likely to fuel a �reverse brain-drain� with skilled workers returning to their home country, according to a new report released today by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
The situation is even bleaker as the number of employment visas issued to immigrants from any single country is less than 10,000 per year with a wait time of several years.
�The United States benefits from having foreign-born innovators create their ideas in this country,� said Vivek Wadhwa, Wertheim fellow with the Harvard Law School and executive in residence at Duke University. �Their departures would be detrimental to U.S. economic well-being. And, when foreigners come to the United States, collaborate with Americans in developing and patenting new ideas, and employ those ideas in business in ways they could not readily do in their home countries, the world benefits.�
Conducted by researchers at Duke University, New York University and Harvard University, the study is the third in a series of studies focusing on immigrants� contributions to the competitiveness of the U.S. economy. Earlier research revealed a dramatic increase in the contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property over an eight-year period.
In this study, "Intellectual Property, the Immigration Backlog, and a Reverse Brain-Drain," researchers offer a more refined measure of this rise in contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property and seek to explain this increase with an analysis of the immigrant-visa backlog for skilled workers. The key finding from this research is that the number of skilled workers waiting for visas is significantly larger than the number that can be admitted to the United States. This imbalance creates the potential for a sizeable reverse brain-drain from the United States to the skilled workers� home countries.
The earlier studies, �America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs� and �Entrepreneurship, Education and Immigration: America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part II,� documented that one in four engineering and technology companies founded between 1995 and 2005 had an immigrant founder. Researchers found that these companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Indian immigrants founded more companies than the next four groups (from the United Kingdom, China, Taiwan and Japan) combined.
Furthermore, these companies� founders tended to be highly educated in science, technology, math and engineering-related disciplines, with 96 percent holding bachelor�s degrees and 75 percent holding master�s or PhD degrees.
Among key findings in the most recent report:
Foreign nationals residing in the United States were named as inventors or co-inventors in 25.6 percent of international patent applications filed from the United States in 2006. This represents an increase from 7.6 percent in 1998.
Foreign nationals contributed to more than half of the international patents filed by a number of large, multi-national companies, including Qualcomm (72 percent), Merck & Co. (65 percent), General Electric (64 percent), Siemens (63 percent) and Cisco (60 percent). Forty-one percent of the patents filed by the U.S. government had foreign nationals as inventors or co-inventors.
In 2006, 16.8 percent of international patent applications from the United States had an inventor or co-inventor with a Chinese-heritage name, representing an increase from 11.2 percent in 1998. The contribution of inventors with Indian-heritage names increased to 13.7 percent from 9.5 percent in the same period.
The total number of employment-based principals in the employment-based categories and their family members waiting for legal permanent residence in the United States in 2006 was estimated at 1,055,084. Additionally, there are an estimated 126,421 residents abroad also waiting for employment-based U.S. legal permanent residence, adding up to a worldwide total of 1,181,505.
Using data from the New Immigrant Survey, the authors find that, in 2003, approximately one in five new legal immigrants in the United States and about one in three employment-based new legal immigrants either planned to leave the United States or were uncertain about remaining. The authors had no data on how many foreign nationals have actually returned to their homelands.
�Given that the U.S. comparative advantage in the global economy is in creating knowledge and applying it to business, it behooves the country to consider how we might adjust policies to reduce the immigration backlog, encourage innovative foreign minds to remain in the country, and entice new innovators to come,� said Robert Litan, vice president of Research and Policy at the Kauffman Foundation.
About the research team
For more information about the Global Engineering and Entrepreneurship research at Duke University, visit http://www.globalizationresearch.com; visit http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/lwp/ to learn about Harvard Law�s Labor and Worklife Program; and visit http://www.nyu.edu/ for more information about New York University.
Read the report
hot kate beckinsale van helsing costume. This Van Helsing Tojo costume accessory
BhanuPriya
01-12 03:44 PM
Received I140 Approved Documents using FOI Act.
I use to suffer from my rough Employer (Desi), who never used to give me any of my Immigration Documents including Approved H1 dosument. I asked him to give atleast my H1 document so that I can go for Visa Stamping. He is such a bloody rough and he wants me to stay with him as bonded labor. I used to beg my Salary every month and never use to get my payment what I need to receive.
Meanwhile, I heard about FOI (Freedom of Information Act) and applied for it in 7 months back for the Approved I140 Documents. I applied for it and forget. To my surprise I received all the I140 related Approved documents yesterday evening. I have already changed that rough Employer without Approved H1 Notice. Now, I am very happy person working for a nice and decent Employer.
Thanks to all supporters/friends who work in these forums providing Information for the benefit of other people.
I use to suffer from my rough Employer (Desi), who never used to give me any of my Immigration Documents including Approved H1 dosument. I asked him to give atleast my H1 document so that I can go for Visa Stamping. He is such a bloody rough and he wants me to stay with him as bonded labor. I used to beg my Salary every month and never use to get my payment what I need to receive.
Meanwhile, I heard about FOI (Freedom of Information Act) and applied for it in 7 months back for the Approved I140 Documents. I applied for it and forget. To my surprise I received all the I140 related Approved documents yesterday evening. I have already changed that rough Employer without Approved H1 Notice. Now, I am very happy person working for a nice and decent Employer.
Thanks to all supporters/friends who work in these forums providing Information for the benefit of other people.
more...
house donning that long hair.
naushit
02-12 03:22 PM
Chris,
This is what I did, I just called and told them I need to do FP, can you please schedule it for me?, and surprisingly without any resistance they just scheduled my finger prints for First week of March! (yesterday I received FP notice,scheduled for fist week of March 2009).
I do not think without valid FP your case will pass their , "ready to approve" filter criteria.
so get your FP done.
Good luck,
Regards,
-N
You are right. My finger prints are expired and called several times and took info pass.
Same answer, " if IO thinks need FP, they will send. Wait for their decission". :mad:
This is what I did, I just called and told them I need to do FP, can you please schedule it for me?, and surprisingly without any resistance they just scheduled my finger prints for First week of March! (yesterday I received FP notice,scheduled for fist week of March 2009).
I do not think without valid FP your case will pass their , "ready to approve" filter criteria.
so get your FP done.
Good luck,
Regards,
-N
You are right. My finger prints are expired and called several times and took info pass.
Same answer, " if IO thinks need FP, they will send. Wait for their decission". :mad:
tattoo kate beckinsale van helsing costume. find sideshow van helsing
dontcareaboutGC
03-19 11:24 AM
Ignore this if this is a repost!
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
more...
pictures kate beckinsale van helsing
AirWaterandGC
05-15 12:04 AM
I have repeatedly said that is not about any one person's GC. Count on me to be with IV even when I get mine. Its the fight for justice.
dresses kate beckinsale, van
GotGC??
02-20 04:48 PM
This is useful, but I doubt its accuracy because some of the cases I know - including mine - are missing !!
Here is the link to database:
http://www.flcdatacenter.com/CasePerm.aspx
Here is the link to database:
http://www.flcdatacenter.com/CasePerm.aspx
more...
makeup 19 middot; kate beckinsale naked van helsing nipples
Sakthisagar
02-24 03:45 PM
Yes, and Yes I am married and have dependendts so H4 also. Yes April 2010,
You can extend it one week before, one thing you need to keep in mind, in some of the States, your Driver's Licence is as long as your H1 is valid, so that means you cannot legally drive any vehicle if your Driver's licence is expired, usually DMV never accepts receipts they want to see the approved I-797.
So there are some disadvantages if your visa expiry date is so close, usually people apply on Premium processing giving more Extension fees. Premium Processing USCIS have to answer you within 10 working days. at least you will get the RFE before 10 days.
You can extend it one week before, one thing you need to keep in mind, in some of the States, your Driver's Licence is as long as your H1 is valid, so that means you cannot legally drive any vehicle if your Driver's licence is expired, usually DMV never accepts receipts they want to see the approved I-797.
So there are some disadvantages if your visa expiry date is so close, usually people apply on Premium processing giving more Extension fees. Premium Processing USCIS have to answer you within 10 working days. at least you will get the RFE before 10 days.
girlfriend kate beckinsale hair silvia
brb2
10-14 10:14 AM
One of the reasons for huge number of patents in the US is that many companies, file frivilous patents to slow down competition not just to protect their intellectual property. No doubt the patents in the pharma industry are genuine, but a typical product like a freezer may have several hundred patents.
You are right .. the US has a big headstart; but that doesnt mean it will remain that way forever. For instance, close to 40% of all US patents are being bagged by either non-US entities or foreign outposts of US organizations. For a comparison, it was just 10% in 1995 .. dont remember where I read this, but I will post the link if I can find it again.
You are right .. the US has a big headstart; but that doesnt mean it will remain that way forever. For instance, close to 40% of all US patents are being bagged by either non-US entities or foreign outposts of US organizations. For a comparison, it was just 10% in 1995 .. dont remember where I read this, but I will post the link if I can find it again.
hairstyles kate beckinsale wallpaper van
gccube
04-21 03:19 PM
Congratulations on getting your GC !!!
I need to ask you a question as I don't see on LUD after FP in 485. However LUD changed on my approved I-140.
Was there any LUD on I-140 case after your FP?
Regards
last summer. The only two LUDs I have noticed on my I-485 are
1. 8/22/2007 :: This is after my FP
2. 04/21/2008 (Today) :: This is after my I-485 is approved.
I have not noticed an LUD even late last night.
Interestingly, the TSC processing dates have moved to June 29 2007 in the newly released processing times and my RD (06/21/2007) fall with in this period. So my approval could be a result of the progressed processing dates for this month.
I need to ask you a question as I don't see on LUD after FP in 485. However LUD changed on my approved I-140.
Was there any LUD on I-140 case after your FP?
Regards
last summer. The only two LUDs I have noticed on my I-485 are
1. 8/22/2007 :: This is after my FP
2. 04/21/2008 (Today) :: This is after my I-485 is approved.
I have not noticed an LUD even late last night.
Interestingly, the TSC processing dates have moved to June 29 2007 in the newly released processing times and my RD (06/21/2007) fall with in this period. So my approval could be a result of the progressed processing dates for this month.
rex
04-25 03:06 PM
Thank you all for a bunch of good answers.
I will do the electronic address change and send a letter to uscis to represent myself and wait a month before sending in the AC21 letter.
seems to be the best option here.
Pappu. i have updated my profile. I am not a power user of this site because of some restrictions at work, but do appreciate what all of you are doing for the community.
Thank you
Rex
I will do the electronic address change and send a letter to uscis to represent myself and wait a month before sending in the AC21 letter.
seems to be the best option here.
Pappu. i have updated my profile. I am not a power user of this site because of some restrictions at work, but do appreciate what all of you are doing for the community.
Thank you
Rex
mundram
04-20 02:09 PM
Luckily it was Dalls Airport (DFW) for me...but in my opinion you will have to go to the (international) airport!!
No comments:
Post a Comment