mbawa2574
04-24 04:19 PM
B1/B2 is always prone to reject by 221(b). Wont impact that much.
More jobs will offshore. Indian companies will lower their billing rates drastically as they will move away from onshore/offshore model.
Go Wipro Go infosys Go TCS !!!! Do it the other way.
More jobs will offshore. Indian companies will lower their billing rates drastically as they will move away from onshore/offshore model.
Go Wipro Go infosys Go TCS !!!! Do it the other way.
wallpaper Google 1998. Stanford Search!
Saralayar
01-15 12:29 AM
Some ideas are good. In order to implement them, we need support from members. Pls volunteer and take up the ideas to lead them. For example I have mentioned about poster and banner campaign. If each one of us, prints them and post them in various places, we can get good publicity.
We have to make do with such low cost volunteer work. Someone pointed out that we should contact newspapers and get articles published. Wish it was so easy. We have written tons of mails but that alone does not work. You need to issue press releases and publish them online. Publishing them each online costs a couple hundred dollars by publishing services who distribute, and there is no guarantee it will be picked up. Thus you need a focussed campaign for it. There are services where you can contact reporters and media on a specific topic and send them email, press release directly. If they are already writing article you can know the deadline. If you have an idea, you can pitch a story idea to the reporter directly. A good service I know costs 5K for non profits for one year. If you need access to International reporters database add 2k to it. All this is possible only if we have these kinds of resources. When we can hardly get contributions of 5k in 4 months after collecting $5 each, it is tough to plan a big media campaign. The reason why other big organizations and big anti immigrant orgs can get so much publicity is that they probably can spend their huge resources on such services. They can also afford a full time staff. We do not have all that and run IV along with our full time day time jobs. So the first thing we need to do before we run any campaign is to get more members and more contributions and monthly signups. Without that ideas may only remain on the forums.
Today, I have posted the idea of this thread in Change.gov site. All members please visit the site and vote for this idea.
http://citizensbriefingbook.change.gov/ideas/ideaList.apexp?lsi=1
We have to make do with such low cost volunteer work. Someone pointed out that we should contact newspapers and get articles published. Wish it was so easy. We have written tons of mails but that alone does not work. You need to issue press releases and publish them online. Publishing them each online costs a couple hundred dollars by publishing services who distribute, and there is no guarantee it will be picked up. Thus you need a focussed campaign for it. There are services where you can contact reporters and media on a specific topic and send them email, press release directly. If they are already writing article you can know the deadline. If you have an idea, you can pitch a story idea to the reporter directly. A good service I know costs 5K for non profits for one year. If you need access to International reporters database add 2k to it. All this is possible only if we have these kinds of resources. When we can hardly get contributions of 5k in 4 months after collecting $5 each, it is tough to plan a big media campaign. The reason why other big organizations and big anti immigrant orgs can get so much publicity is that they probably can spend their huge resources on such services. They can also afford a full time staff. We do not have all that and run IV along with our full time day time jobs. So the first thing we need to do before we run any campaign is to get more members and more contributions and monthly signups. Without that ideas may only remain on the forums.
Today, I have posted the idea of this thread in Change.gov site. All members please visit the site and vote for this idea.
http://citizensbriefingbook.change.gov/ideas/ideaList.apexp?lsi=1
srinivas_o
10-10 10:32 PM
I am july 2nd filer, got my receipt numbers by calling USCIS. My data was entered in their system on Oct 5th. I called them today and the Immigration Official gave them. I also filed for my wife, but still her information is not yet there in the system. My application went to NSC, signed by R.Mickels at 9:01 AM, but transferred to TSC as my receipt number starts with SRC.
Good Luck to everybody else who yet to receive the receipts...
Good Luck to everybody else who yet to receive the receipts...
2011 But Google#39;s Larry Page and
Libra
06-16 12:08 PM
What is I-94# is it the number on I-94 no. attached 797 form or arrival i-94 card(white) no? And what is nonimmigrant visa number? guys please help am filling 485 form.
more...
texanguy
10-01 03:25 PM
This point has been already discussed before.it was mentioned that married dependents can be added later on if their country of birth is different...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/3rd%20Level%20(Left%20Nav%20Children)/Green%20Card%20-%203rd%20Level/Pending%20Form%20I485%20Reports.pdf
How come there is pending cases in 2007, 2008 and 2009 for EB2 and EB3 India?
From the PDF I see the following
EB2
2007 after july fiasco - 559
2008 - 178
2009 - 9
EB3
2007 after july fiasco - 466
2008 - 88
2009 - 5
My understanding is that the visa bulletin were never open for priorty dates from Aug 2007 to till date....EVER..
I may be missing something..
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/3rd%20Level%20(Left%20Nav%20Children)/Green%20Card%20-%203rd%20Level/Pending%20Form%20I485%20Reports.pdf
How come there is pending cases in 2007, 2008 and 2009 for EB2 and EB3 India?
From the PDF I see the following
EB2
2007 after july fiasco - 559
2008 - 178
2009 - 9
EB3
2007 after july fiasco - 466
2008 - 88
2009 - 5
My understanding is that the visa bulletin were never open for priorty dates from Aug 2007 to till date....EVER..
I may be missing something..
illinois_alum
08-12 11:28 AM
I have the same situation. CPO change date on 5th, email on 6th. Since then, no LUD, status changes, email, or snail mail.
No need to worry...I got my physical cards yesterday in the mail - about 7 business days after CPO update. You will get the cards soon...
No need to worry...I got my physical cards yesterday in the mail - about 7 business days after CPO update. You will get the cards soon...
more...
pitha
07-01 11:21 AM
Lets say DOS revises bulletin on july 2, does that mean applications recieved on july 2 are accepted and all applications recieved after 2 will be rejected or will USCIS reject all applications recieved on july 2 also.
2010 Google Logo 6th August 1998
rodnyb
04-06 09:37 PM
I am sure this post be deleted by admin. I am just stating few facts I know here
QSHEMK set up his own blog, and put some ads.. why?
I said this before (and it was deleted, and now I cannot even post a new thread.. I am all green on post, lol). Everyone has his/her own interest, to make the IV work, we have to work together, donation or not, effort or not... all the time, writings ppl put here are contributions....
I appreciate what IV is doing, just saying.. no offense
Guys,
We rode the same wave even last year with many of the same Guru;s predicting the same movement to 2007 and what we saw 2 weeks movement . There was one person called QSHEMK who after that went completely out of the picture or has rejoined with a new name .
Also I have analyzed that people who have a date in 2008 somehow predict that the dates might move to 2008 and people who have a PD of July predict that dates will move to August . This is just an observation and nothing more , and if you go through the threads thats exactly what you will see.
I will be equally benefited as you all will if the predictions come true , but be well prepared for a major heartbreak also like last year .
While it takes a lot of effort from some of the members to crunch such numbers I would be first to extend my sincere gratitude to them for doing this , I would also recommend you all to take the analysis and predictions with a grain of salt and not to raise your hopes too much on these predictions.
It has seldom worked for the last 6 years at least . Hope it does this time . I speak from experience in IV since 2006.
QSHEMK set up his own blog, and put some ads.. why?
I said this before (and it was deleted, and now I cannot even post a new thread.. I am all green on post, lol). Everyone has his/her own interest, to make the IV work, we have to work together, donation or not, effort or not... all the time, writings ppl put here are contributions....
I appreciate what IV is doing, just saying.. no offense
Guys,
We rode the same wave even last year with many of the same Guru;s predicting the same movement to 2007 and what we saw 2 weeks movement . There was one person called QSHEMK who after that went completely out of the picture or has rejoined with a new name .
Also I have analyzed that people who have a date in 2008 somehow predict that the dates might move to 2008 and people who have a PD of July predict that dates will move to August . This is just an observation and nothing more , and if you go through the threads thats exactly what you will see.
I will be equally benefited as you all will if the predictions come true , but be well prepared for a major heartbreak also like last year .
While it takes a lot of effort from some of the members to crunch such numbers I would be first to extend my sincere gratitude to them for doing this , I would also recommend you all to take the analysis and predictions with a grain of salt and not to raise your hopes too much on these predictions.
It has seldom worked for the last 6 years at least . Hope it does this time . I speak from experience in IV since 2006.
more...
axp817
09-20 04:28 PM
I am not sure what is happening. When I went to USCIS during Infopass, the officer at the time told me that my case will be looked upon when the notice date comes up.
MY priority date is april25 2006 and the notice date was 09/18/2007. I didn't believe him. Even I raised the question in one of the forums and other guys shot me down saying the notice date is not important. But now I got an LUD on 09/19/2007 and that was the reason why I raised this question to you as well as HIINVIN66. I am assuming that the applications are looked upon based on the notice dates. If they under EB2, pre adjudcated and visa numbers availaible, MAY BE MAYBE we get green cards. IF not, We have to keep our fingers crossed. Let see what happens.....
That's been my understanding all along. Applications are approved per the Notice Date, provided the applicant's PD is current. But I know, we've all seen exceptions to that rule. I guess this is more relevant in your case since you're current, but I'm not, so it doesn't really matter too much anyway. I just don't want any RFEs.
MY priority date is april25 2006 and the notice date was 09/18/2007. I didn't believe him. Even I raised the question in one of the forums and other guys shot me down saying the notice date is not important. But now I got an LUD on 09/19/2007 and that was the reason why I raised this question to you as well as HIINVIN66. I am assuming that the applications are looked upon based on the notice dates. If they under EB2, pre adjudcated and visa numbers availaible, MAY BE MAYBE we get green cards. IF not, We have to keep our fingers crossed. Let see what happens.....
That's been my understanding all along. Applications are approved per the Notice Date, provided the applicant's PD is current. But I know, we've all seen exceptions to that rule. I guess this is more relevant in your case since you're current, but I'm not, so it doesn't really matter too much anyway. I just don't want any RFEs.
hair logo google 1998 logo.
anilsal
07-09 08:51 PM
But do you think that by constantly irritating USCIS, all dates of 2005-06-07 guys will be current again?
Since when was the flower campaign meant as a irritant?
Since when was the flower campaign meant as a irritant?
more...
seeking_GC
10-02 12:41 AM
service center is Nebraska.
Infact my 485 got denied in August 2009 and in september 2009 filed MTR,which got approved on 22 sep 2009 and today we got 485 approval emails.
Hi pro,
could you please check your PM?
Infact my 485 got denied in August 2009 and in september 2009 filed MTR,which got approved on 22 sep 2009 and today we got 485 approval emails.
Hi pro,
could you please check your PM?
hot logo google 1998 logo.
gc28262
06-13 01:25 PM
gc26...., It seems that you have missed the point again. Any logical person will have the capability to comprehend that this thread is against visa abuse in L1 category.. If you still didn't get it, objective is to explore the options to report abuse of L1. Benefits are: genuine people still get the opportunity, reduce over supply in market, not bring wages down etc.
Its that simple. If you can give me 1 good reason to not bring this issue up, I can definitely discuss the issue. But, stop giving me this crap about raising voice and being right...
Totally, non baseless argument by you and Ganguteli...
I never said raising this issue is illegal. BTW I was not replying to "l1fraud". My comment was directed at "dilipcr" who is of the opinion that Grassley's bill is good and IV core and the forum should support it so that he can have a secure job.
BTW is l1fraud or others raising this issue out of love for law ? no way. That was my point.
Its that simple. If you can give me 1 good reason to not bring this issue up, I can definitely discuss the issue. But, stop giving me this crap about raising voice and being right...
Totally, non baseless argument by you and Ganguteli...
I never said raising this issue is illegal. BTW I was not replying to "l1fraud". My comment was directed at "dilipcr" who is of the opinion that Grassley's bill is good and IV core and the forum should support it so that he can have a secure job.
BTW is l1fraud or others raising this issue out of love for law ? no way. That was my point.
more...
house Google Doodles Since 1998.
GC08
07-09 09:01 PM
Actually I thought they will not accept flowers. But for courtesy and humanity touch they are forwarding. Because of these atleast flowers have some purpose without wastage. This campaign will not have any impact on functioning of USCIS as they are following law. These mistakes are common in every Government organisations and time time mistakes are being corrected. Even congressional hearing happens and finds mistake they will prevent future mistakes like this. It is unlikely for affected persons to get relief immediately. But Many persons will get relief automatically on oct 2007 when DOS sets Cutoff date. I expect cut off date for EB3 2003 or 2004 and for EB2 2005.
I just felt that they did something that most people would not understand. I think the mess today is the result of a series of missteps they took. They not only mismanaged the whole green card thing but also mismanaged the public relations. Hopefully, they have learned from all these dramas. :cool:
I just felt that they did something that most people would not understand. I think the mess today is the result of a series of missteps they took. They not only mismanaged the whole green card thing but also mismanaged the public relations. Hopefully, they have learned from all these dramas. :cool:
tattoo Picture 1, -, Google1998
Saralayar
01-09 01:43 PM
Core IV can consolidate the valueable points like this for the argument.
There is a rumor that Obama is considering Citizenship for people who have paid Income Tax for a certain period. Core is it possible to dig more on this and find if it is just a rumor?
There is a rumor that Obama is considering Citizenship for people who have paid Income Tax for a certain period. Core is it possible to dig more on this and find if it is just a rumor?
more...
pictures Beijing google 1998 logo.
PlainSpeak
04-04 08:18 PM
He told me EB2 dates might move to the end of financial year 2009 so that would mean Sep 2009. There are you happy now .....
Now stop this stupid thread
Aapne lalach ka yeh behuda natak ab band karo
Think about all those EB3 I out there. Have some shame. How would they feel if you talk about your own GC and get giddy about it in the forum when they have no hope. At least take your rejoicing to a private donor forum.
Thats the least you can do
Now stop this stupid thread
Aapne lalach ka yeh behuda natak ab band karo
Think about all those EB3 I out there. Have some shame. How would they feel if you talk about your own GC and get giddy about it in the forum when they have no hope. At least take your rejoicing to a private donor forum.
Thats the least you can do
dresses Ken Solomon, Google Portrait
nomad
07-12 02:22 AM
http://www.sacbee.com/110/story/262484.html
Editorial: Green card fiasco
Stop mistreating those who play by rules
-
Published 12:00 am PDT Monday, July 9, 2007
If you want to know what's really wrong with our immigration system, consider the July debacle at the Citizen and Immigration Service.
Individuals and businesses typically have to wait years to apply for "green cards" for permanent residency based on job skills. The backlogs have been so severe that an engineer from India or China has had to wait six years to apply for a green card. In other employment categories, the wait can be nine to 11 years. For people from the Philippines, the wait in some work categories is 22 years.
But then in the monthly Visa Bulletin issued June 13, the State Department said that employment-based visas would be available.
This set off a rush among sponsoring businesses and individuals who have waited in line for years to apply for green cards. Thousands prepared applications and mailed them in time for the immigration service to receive them by July 2, the first day of the application window.
Then on that very day, the State Department issued a "never mind" update, announcing that the 60,000 green cards it had expected to offer would no longer be available. The thousands who submitted applications will have their applications sent back to them.
As Los Angeles immigration attorney Carl Shusterman said last Tuesday, "We're right back to square one, with scientists, engineers, teachers and health care workers having to wait in endless lines for employment-based visas."
Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, chairwoman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security and International Law sent irate letters to the Secretary of State and Secretary of Homeland Security. She said that changing course midmonth is contrary to years of practice, would result in the loss of thousands of dollars already expended by sponsoring businesses and individuals to prepare applications and, more important, would "threaten the integrity and predictability of our immigration system."
This is no way to treat people who try to play by the rules.
The Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman notes in his 2007 annual report to Congress that the nation has a "perpetual backlog" of employment-based green card applications. This backlog means that even green cards that should be available aren't used. This contributes to the backlog; if green cards are not issued in the year they are authorized, they are lost.
In 2006, more than 10,000 employment-based green cards were lost, even though the immigration service had 100,000 to 150,000 applications waiting to be processed. Since 1994, nearly 219,000 employment-based green cards have been lost because the immigration service isn't processing enough applications in a timely manner.
It gets worse. The funds appropriated by Congress to jumpstart a backlog elimination project expired Sept. 30. The backlog will continue.
In the long term, this country needs to increase the number of employment-based green cards to meet demand. But if the immigration service cannot even process applications in a timely fashion for the current numbers of employment-based green cards that are supposed to be available, what's the point?
In the short term, if Congress and the president do nothing else regarding immigration reform, they should at least make sure that the immigration service processes green card applications in timely fashion. The backlog is inexcusable and contributes to the nation's illegal immigration problem. If we want people to play by the rules, we have to make it possible for them to do so.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Editorial: Green card fiasco
Stop mistreating those who play by rules
-
Published 12:00 am PDT Monday, July 9, 2007
If you want to know what's really wrong with our immigration system, consider the July debacle at the Citizen and Immigration Service.
Individuals and businesses typically have to wait years to apply for "green cards" for permanent residency based on job skills. The backlogs have been so severe that an engineer from India or China has had to wait six years to apply for a green card. In other employment categories, the wait can be nine to 11 years. For people from the Philippines, the wait in some work categories is 22 years.
But then in the monthly Visa Bulletin issued June 13, the State Department said that employment-based visas would be available.
This set off a rush among sponsoring businesses and individuals who have waited in line for years to apply for green cards. Thousands prepared applications and mailed them in time for the immigration service to receive them by July 2, the first day of the application window.
Then on that very day, the State Department issued a "never mind" update, announcing that the 60,000 green cards it had expected to offer would no longer be available. The thousands who submitted applications will have their applications sent back to them.
As Los Angeles immigration attorney Carl Shusterman said last Tuesday, "We're right back to square one, with scientists, engineers, teachers and health care workers having to wait in endless lines for employment-based visas."
Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, chairwoman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security and International Law sent irate letters to the Secretary of State and Secretary of Homeland Security. She said that changing course midmonth is contrary to years of practice, would result in the loss of thousands of dollars already expended by sponsoring businesses and individuals to prepare applications and, more important, would "threaten the integrity and predictability of our immigration system."
This is no way to treat people who try to play by the rules.
The Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman notes in his 2007 annual report to Congress that the nation has a "perpetual backlog" of employment-based green card applications. This backlog means that even green cards that should be available aren't used. This contributes to the backlog; if green cards are not issued in the year they are authorized, they are lost.
In 2006, more than 10,000 employment-based green cards were lost, even though the immigration service had 100,000 to 150,000 applications waiting to be processed. Since 1994, nearly 219,000 employment-based green cards have been lost because the immigration service isn't processing enough applications in a timely manner.
It gets worse. The funds appropriated by Congress to jumpstart a backlog elimination project expired Sept. 30. The backlog will continue.
In the long term, this country needs to increase the number of employment-based green cards to meet demand. But if the immigration service cannot even process applications in a timely fashion for the current numbers of employment-based green cards that are supposed to be available, what's the point?
In the short term, if Congress and the president do nothing else regarding immigration reform, they should at least make sure that the immigration service processes green card applications in timely fashion. The backlog is inexcusable and contributes to the nation's illegal immigration problem. If we want people to play by the rules, we have to make it possible for them to do so.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
more...
makeup google 1998
pappu
05-09 11:17 AM
Folks,
I would like to run a questions by you guys/gals. I am getting ready to file my I-485 application. My lawyer requested that I find all copies of my I-20, OPT EAD, H1-B's etc. My question is do we have to submit copies of I-20, and OPT EAD for the Adjustment of status (I-485) stage ? Please let me know what you think ?
I-20 is from a university that accept students in the US. The F1 student visa is issued based on the I-20.
OPT EAD - Is one year of practical training that is allowed after graduation
It would help if someone can put a list of all documents needed for 485 filing on this thread to help all such questions.
I would like to run a questions by you guys/gals. I am getting ready to file my I-485 application. My lawyer requested that I find all copies of my I-20, OPT EAD, H1-B's etc. My question is do we have to submit copies of I-20, and OPT EAD for the Adjustment of status (I-485) stage ? Please let me know what you think ?
I-20 is from a university that accept students in the US. The F1 student visa is issued based on the I-20.
OPT EAD - Is one year of practical training that is allowed after graduation
It would help if someone can put a list of all documents needed for 485 filing on this thread to help all such questions.
girlfriend friend of mine in 1998.
dingudi
01-11 08:37 AM
One of my co-workers recently went for 10th year stamping to Mumbai consulate. He was asked to wait for 4 weeks. Looks like renewals and extensions beyond 6th year are taking long time for stamping. He works for fortune 500 companies and with 20,000+ empoyees worldwide.
hairstyles Eclipse Front google 1998
Macaca
07-22 08:27 AM
Lou Dobbs Tonight 03/28/2007 (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0703/28/ldt.01.html): "It's pretty remarkable. Four hundred thousand H1 visas each year."
Temporary Admissions of Nonimmigrants to the United States: 2005 (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/2005_NI_rpt.pdf) By ELIZABETH M. GRIECO | DHS, Jul 2006
Nonimmigrant visas allow foreign nationals to travel to a U.S. port of entry, such as an international airport, a seaport, or a land border crossing. However, they do not guarantee entry. At the port of entry, an immigration officer of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) authorizes a traveler’s admission into the United States and the period of stay (i.e., the length of time the bearer of a nonimmigrant visa is allowed to remain in the United States) for that visit. The initial authorized stay is noted in the DHS Form I-94 Form issued to the nonimmigrant by CBP.
Many visas are valid for several years, allowing those visa holders to enter the United States multiple times. Nonimmigrants on long-term visas, however, are still issued an authorized period of stay by CBP each time they are admitted.
TECS is the primary source for data collected from the Arrival-Departure Record, also known as DHS Form
I-942. Nonimmigrants arriving by air, land, or sea are required to complete Form I-94, with two important exceptions. Canadians who travel to the United States as tourists or on business generally do not need the I-94 Form. Also, certain Mexicans who have a nonresident alien Border Crossing Card, commonly known as a laser visa or a multiple-entry nonimmigrant visa, may not be required to complete the I-94 Form for entry. These exceptions are significant because Canadian and Mexican citizens make up the vast majority of all nonimmigrant admissions.
This Office of Immigration Statistics Annual Flow Report examines the number and characteristics of nonimmigrant admissions in 20051 recorded by the Treasury Enforcement Communications Systems (TECS) of the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
The data presented in this report are derived from the Treasury Enforcement Communications System (TECS) of the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Customs and Border Protection. TECS compiles and maintains information collected from nonimmigrants by DHS Form I-94, which asks for dates of arrival and departure as well as limited demographic information, such as name, sex, nationality, and date of birth.
I-94 Forms issued at air and sea ports of entry, in most cases, can be used for a single entry only. Each time a nonimmigrant enters the United States via air or sea, the arrival portion of the I-94 Form is collected and the information is entered into the data system. Conversely, each time a nonimmigrant leaves the United States via air or sea, the
departure portion is collected and the additional data is recorded into TECS.
By comparison, I-94 Forms issued at land border ports of entry, in most cases, can be used for multiple entries during an authorized period of admission. The arrival portion of the I-94 Form is collected and entered into the data system only at the time of initial form issuance and admission. Thus, while a nonimmigrant may enter the United States at a land border port of entry numerous times using the same I-94 Form, the arrival information recorded in TECS refers to the initial entry only. Also, a nonimmigrant who has been issued a multiple-entry I-94 and who leaves the United States via the land border is not required to surrender the departure portion of the form if the authorized period of admission is still valid and the nonimmigrant intends to return before the I-94 Form has expired.
The information from the departure portion of the form is recorded into TECS after the nonimmigrant surrenders the form. Although TECS records both arrival and departure data, the information presented in this report is based on arrival data only.
Many nonimmigrants, such as students, diplomats, and temporary workers, enter and leave the United States more than once each year, and the TECS system separately records each new issuance of an I-94 Form at arrival and each I-94 Form collected at departure. Since the arrival data are collected each time a new I-94 Form is issued, and an individual might enter more than once in a fiscal year, the count of admissions exceeds the number of individuals arriving.
In 2005, for example, there were 32 million I-94 admissions recorded by TECS, but only 26.9 million individuals entered the United States (see Table 2). Of those 26.9 million, 88 percent arrived once while 12 percent arrived two or more times during the year. This report uses TECS data to describe the number and characteristics of the 32 million I-94 admissions and not the 26.9 million individual nonimmigrants.
There is no limit on the total number of nonimmigrants admitted each year.
There are also limits on the number of petitions approved for initial employment for certain categories of temporary workers. For example, in 2005, high-skilled H-1B visas for certain first-time applicants were limited to 65,000. In general, there are few limitations on the number of immediate family members who can enter the country with nonimmigrant visa holders.
From How many H-1B visa workers? Counts vary (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=114543&postcount=737) VALLEY EMPLOYERS AMONG TOP USERS By Chris O'Brien (cobrien@mercurynews.com or (415) 298-0207) | Mercury News, 07/15/2007
A company that wants H-1B visas files an application with the U.S. Department of Labor. The Labor Department screens the applications, then passes them to the Department of Homeland Security, which includes the office of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Applications approved by the immigration service are then forwarded to the U.S. Department of State, which actually issues the visas.
There's a startling lack of publicly available data about the program, which makes it almost impossible to know which companies are getting the controversial visas and why. And much of the data that does exist is disputed by one side or another.
Oracle was issued 1,022 H-1B visas in calendar year 2006, a figure that includes renewals of previously issued visas. But Robert Hoffman, an Oracle spokesman, said his company could only confirm that it made 170 new H-1B hires in the federal government's fiscal year 2007, which runs from October to September.
The list is dominated by India-based outsourcing companies, such as Wipro and Infosys, which at No. 1 and No. 2 respectively received 3,143 and 3,125 new visas. The only Silicon Valley company on the list was Intel, ranked No. 13 with 613. Microsoft was fifth with 1,297.
But another list circulating on Capitol Hill told a somewhat different story. That list was also from the Homeland Security Department and included the number of new visas as well as the number of renewal visas.
According to that list, Oracle outranked Intel, receiving 1,022 visas in 2006. Intel received 828, as did Cisco; Yahoo received 347; and Hewlett-Packard received 333.
But Shotwell, the tech-industry lobbyist, said such tallies are misleading because companies often file multiple applications for a single person or large blanket applications for a number of positions they might not ultimately need because they want as many as possible before the cap is reached.
The federal government awarded 124,096 H-1B visas in the fiscal year ending October 2005, the most recent annual totals available. That includes renewed visas, which don't count against the annual cap.
From Characteristics of Specialty Occupation Workers (H-1B): Fiscal Year 2005 (http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/H1B_FY05_Characteristics.pdf) November 2006
Number of H1B petitions approved for initial employment is 116,927. (page 5)
The number of approved petitions exceeds the number of individual H-1B workers because more than one U.S. employer may file a petition on behalf of an individual H-1B worker. (page 5)
Blogged at All Reader Comments (http://app.businessweek.com/UserComments/combo_review?action=all&style=wide&productId=20045&pageIndex=5) for A Green Light on the Road to Green Cards (http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jul2007/db20070717_923080.htm?chan=search)
Temporary Admissions of Nonimmigrants to the United States: 2005 (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/2005_NI_rpt.pdf) By ELIZABETH M. GRIECO | DHS, Jul 2006
Nonimmigrant visas allow foreign nationals to travel to a U.S. port of entry, such as an international airport, a seaport, or a land border crossing. However, they do not guarantee entry. At the port of entry, an immigration officer of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) authorizes a traveler’s admission into the United States and the period of stay (i.e., the length of time the bearer of a nonimmigrant visa is allowed to remain in the United States) for that visit. The initial authorized stay is noted in the DHS Form I-94 Form issued to the nonimmigrant by CBP.
Many visas are valid for several years, allowing those visa holders to enter the United States multiple times. Nonimmigrants on long-term visas, however, are still issued an authorized period of stay by CBP each time they are admitted.
TECS is the primary source for data collected from the Arrival-Departure Record, also known as DHS Form
I-942. Nonimmigrants arriving by air, land, or sea are required to complete Form I-94, with two important exceptions. Canadians who travel to the United States as tourists or on business generally do not need the I-94 Form. Also, certain Mexicans who have a nonresident alien Border Crossing Card, commonly known as a laser visa or a multiple-entry nonimmigrant visa, may not be required to complete the I-94 Form for entry. These exceptions are significant because Canadian and Mexican citizens make up the vast majority of all nonimmigrant admissions.
This Office of Immigration Statistics Annual Flow Report examines the number and characteristics of nonimmigrant admissions in 20051 recorded by the Treasury Enforcement Communications Systems (TECS) of the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
The data presented in this report are derived from the Treasury Enforcement Communications System (TECS) of the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Customs and Border Protection. TECS compiles and maintains information collected from nonimmigrants by DHS Form I-94, which asks for dates of arrival and departure as well as limited demographic information, such as name, sex, nationality, and date of birth.
I-94 Forms issued at air and sea ports of entry, in most cases, can be used for a single entry only. Each time a nonimmigrant enters the United States via air or sea, the arrival portion of the I-94 Form is collected and the information is entered into the data system. Conversely, each time a nonimmigrant leaves the United States via air or sea, the
departure portion is collected and the additional data is recorded into TECS.
By comparison, I-94 Forms issued at land border ports of entry, in most cases, can be used for multiple entries during an authorized period of admission. The arrival portion of the I-94 Form is collected and entered into the data system only at the time of initial form issuance and admission. Thus, while a nonimmigrant may enter the United States at a land border port of entry numerous times using the same I-94 Form, the arrival information recorded in TECS refers to the initial entry only. Also, a nonimmigrant who has been issued a multiple-entry I-94 and who leaves the United States via the land border is not required to surrender the departure portion of the form if the authorized period of admission is still valid and the nonimmigrant intends to return before the I-94 Form has expired.
The information from the departure portion of the form is recorded into TECS after the nonimmigrant surrenders the form. Although TECS records both arrival and departure data, the information presented in this report is based on arrival data only.
Many nonimmigrants, such as students, diplomats, and temporary workers, enter and leave the United States more than once each year, and the TECS system separately records each new issuance of an I-94 Form at arrival and each I-94 Form collected at departure. Since the arrival data are collected each time a new I-94 Form is issued, and an individual might enter more than once in a fiscal year, the count of admissions exceeds the number of individuals arriving.
In 2005, for example, there were 32 million I-94 admissions recorded by TECS, but only 26.9 million individuals entered the United States (see Table 2). Of those 26.9 million, 88 percent arrived once while 12 percent arrived two or more times during the year. This report uses TECS data to describe the number and characteristics of the 32 million I-94 admissions and not the 26.9 million individual nonimmigrants.
There is no limit on the total number of nonimmigrants admitted each year.
There are also limits on the number of petitions approved for initial employment for certain categories of temporary workers. For example, in 2005, high-skilled H-1B visas for certain first-time applicants were limited to 65,000. In general, there are few limitations on the number of immediate family members who can enter the country with nonimmigrant visa holders.
From How many H-1B visa workers? Counts vary (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=114543&postcount=737) VALLEY EMPLOYERS AMONG TOP USERS By Chris O'Brien (cobrien@mercurynews.com or (415) 298-0207) | Mercury News, 07/15/2007
A company that wants H-1B visas files an application with the U.S. Department of Labor. The Labor Department screens the applications, then passes them to the Department of Homeland Security, which includes the office of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Applications approved by the immigration service are then forwarded to the U.S. Department of State, which actually issues the visas.
There's a startling lack of publicly available data about the program, which makes it almost impossible to know which companies are getting the controversial visas and why. And much of the data that does exist is disputed by one side or another.
Oracle was issued 1,022 H-1B visas in calendar year 2006, a figure that includes renewals of previously issued visas. But Robert Hoffman, an Oracle spokesman, said his company could only confirm that it made 170 new H-1B hires in the federal government's fiscal year 2007, which runs from October to September.
The list is dominated by India-based outsourcing companies, such as Wipro and Infosys, which at No. 1 and No. 2 respectively received 3,143 and 3,125 new visas. The only Silicon Valley company on the list was Intel, ranked No. 13 with 613. Microsoft was fifth with 1,297.
But another list circulating on Capitol Hill told a somewhat different story. That list was also from the Homeland Security Department and included the number of new visas as well as the number of renewal visas.
According to that list, Oracle outranked Intel, receiving 1,022 visas in 2006. Intel received 828, as did Cisco; Yahoo received 347; and Hewlett-Packard received 333.
But Shotwell, the tech-industry lobbyist, said such tallies are misleading because companies often file multiple applications for a single person or large blanket applications for a number of positions they might not ultimately need because they want as many as possible before the cap is reached.
The federal government awarded 124,096 H-1B visas in the fiscal year ending October 2005, the most recent annual totals available. That includes renewed visas, which don't count against the annual cap.
From Characteristics of Specialty Occupation Workers (H-1B): Fiscal Year 2005 (http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/H1B_FY05_Characteristics.pdf) November 2006
Number of H1B petitions approved for initial employment is 116,927. (page 5)
The number of approved petitions exceeds the number of individual H-1B workers because more than one U.S. employer may file a petition on behalf of an individual H-1B worker. (page 5)
Blogged at All Reader Comments (http://app.businessweek.com/UserComments/combo_review?action=all&style=wide&productId=20045&pageIndex=5) for A Green Light on the Road to Green Cards (http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jul2007/db20070717_923080.htm?chan=search)
gc_check
06-29 07:13 PM
I dont know why everybody started to spit on ohio law firm. They just pointed out some news that they got from AILA, right? Lets hope its just a rumor and USCIS doesn't proceed with this revised thing. I am pretty sure that wont happen. Dont worry guys, but dont blame everything on ohio firm. I saw this on several other law firms too.
Before IV, immigration-law used to be the website to get consolidated information related to immigration news, Also most of the updates posted are based on the AILA updates/alerts. It is not fair to get mad at this site, just because he has posts/news that are not liked by vast majority of folks like us. I wish to see the VB dates current, but ��. we all know now, what is real... Retrogression and waiting...
Before IV, immigration-law used to be the website to get consolidated information related to immigration news, Also most of the updates posted are based on the AILA updates/alerts. It is not fair to get mad at this site, just because he has posts/news that are not liked by vast majority of folks like us. I wish to see the VB dates current, but ��. we all know now, what is real... Retrogression and waiting...
ram_ram
01-03 12:24 PM
That is good news.
Thanks for all your efforts..SunJoshi.
Guys,
I got a letter from Cong Tom Price (Rep- GA) saying that the immigration clauses in the Budget Reconciliation Bill did not make it. But he will try to push for those clauses in the immigration bills in 2006.
I got the same message from his DC staff, when I called to follow-up.
SJ
Edited by admin. No personal names please. Only screen names.
Thanks for all your efforts..SunJoshi.
Guys,
I got a letter from Cong Tom Price (Rep- GA) saying that the immigration clauses in the Budget Reconciliation Bill did not make it. But he will try to push for those clauses in the immigration bills in 2006.
I got the same message from his DC staff, when I called to follow-up.
SJ
Edited by admin. No personal names please. Only screen names.