close
Do you like trackitt?
  • jQuery News Ticker now has support for multiple tickers per page!
  • jQuery News Ticker now has support for right-to-left languages!
  • jQuery News Ticker now has support for loading content via an RSS feed!
  • jQuery News Ticker now has an optional fade effect between items!
  • New updates have been made to jQuery News Ticker! Check below for more details!
  • jQuery News Ticker is now compatible with jQuery 1.3.2! See below for further details and for latest download.
  • Further updates to jQuery News Ticker are coming soon!

Member Profile: Zzzzzz (2713 posts)

Advertisement    
 
Hello, I'm Zzzzzz (report this user)
I am from Unknown
I last logged in on 18 Jan 2018
I have been a member since 30 Nov 2011
I have added 2713 posts in trackitt forums
I added my last post on 18 Jan 2018
Zzzzzz's Posts
1 2 3 4 5  Next »
Posted in I-485 Forum on 18 Jan 2018
Topic: EB2 India Spillover

Simple answer is that very low use in FB allows South Korea to use more in EB.

From the September 2016 VB


2. The fiscal year 2016 limit for family-sponsored preference immigrants determined in accordance with Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) is 226,000. The fiscal year 2016 limit for employment-based preference immigrants calculated under INA 201 is 140,338. Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,644 for FY-2016.



South Korea use in FY2016 against the 7% limit.

FB -- 1,071 (179 ere not subject to 7% limit)

EB1 - 1,547
EB2 - 5,157
EB3 - 6,153
EB4 --- 514
EB5 --- 260

Total - 14,702

This is well below the 7% per Country limit of 25,644 for FY-2016.

CO explained this in the April 2010 VB (see Section D. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS) https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal...


If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state’s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.

I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in I-485 Forum on 07 Jan 2018
Topic: Can spouse with EAD use old priority date for new 1-485?

Yes she could do that.

This could only happen if an employer sponsors her for an EB2 position.

She could port her old EB3 PD to her new EB2 I-140. Once approved (and assuming the PD is current), she could then make a request to USCIS that her new I-140 become the basis for your existing I-485's. She would become the primary applicant for AOS and you would become the dependent.

For sake of clarity, you cannot use her PD for your EB category and she cannot use your EB category for her PD.
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in H-1B Forum on 05 Jan 2018
Topic: H1B correction at local CBP ??


what are the options I have to make the correction now while staying now in Unites States?

I agree with permbal.

Try CBP and hope you get someone who is sympathetic.

Otherwise there is no other way but to exit and reenter the USA.
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in H-1B Forum on 05 Jan 2018
Topic: H1B correction at local CBP ??

Your Employer's attorney is correct.

The latest I-94 issued controls your lawful status period.

Assuming your return from travel was after the I-797A approval, then the I-94 issued at POE supercedes the I-94 on the I-797A.

You should have shown your visa AND the I-797A at the POE. The officer would have then issued an I-94 valid to March 2020.

CBP may decline to amend the I-94. It was not issued in error. It was correctly issued based on the documents you presented.

In that case, you would have lawful status until September 2018. If you cannot get a correction made, you would have to exit the USA and reenter before September 2018, showing your visa and the the new H1B approval. You would then be issued an I-94 valid until March 2020.
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in I-485 Forum on 03 Jan 2018
Topic: Adding spouse to pending application.


Hi,
I am current this month and my I485 has been pending since July 2007. I got married in between but have not added my spouse as a dependent. I am trying to get her paper work filed (she is on H1).
In case there is a decision before her paperwork is filed what are my options?


There is no such thing as adding a dependent to an existing application.

Your spouse will file their own I-485 as a dependent based on your EB classification and PD.

This assumes they have no ineligibility to do so.

There is no absolute need for your spouse's application to have been received by USCIS before your own approval.

245(k) allows up to 180 days out of status while doing so. Since your spouse is maintaining status on an independent H1B, this shouldn't be an issue anyway.
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in H-1B Forum on 03 Jan 2018
Topic: Profit to Non-Profit H1B transfer then coming back to Profit

Since your H1B was cap subject, it makes no difference whether your next employer is cap exempt or not, or whether you subsequently moved from a cap exempt back to a cap subject employer.

All time in H1B status (whether for a cap-subject or cap-exempt employer) will count towards the maximum 6 years allowed.

If, at the end of the 6 years, you had not qualified for extensions beyond 6 years under AC21, you would have to spend 1 year physically outside the USA before becoming eligible for an H1B application to be submitted on your behalf.
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in I-485 Forum on 02 Jan 2018
Topic: EB 5 spillover in future

It would likely have no effect in the medium term.

The proposed rule would only apply to new I-526 applications.


(2) Increases to the Investment Amounts

DHS is proposing to increase the minimum investment amounts for all new EB–5 petitioners.



Even with the increased investment amounts, there may well be sufficient high net worth Chinese applicants for the EB5 program.

Even if there were not, there is a huge backlog of existing applications within the system at the current investment amounts.

USCIS has a backlog of I-526 applications, which at the current approval rate and number of dependents per application, equates to nearly 7 years use of the EB5 allocation.

In addition, NVC has over 3 years worth of applications ready to approve as the PD becomes current.

Even if the proposed rule were to cause a precipitous drop in EB5 applications, the effect on EB5 approvals might not be seen for up to a decade.
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in I-131 (Advance Parole) Forum on 30 Dec 2017
Topic: Emergent Advance Parol

I understand the difficulty regarding getting an H4 visa stamped.

In that case, the Advance Parole needs to be approved and issued before travel outside the USA.

It is not possible for the person to leave while the Advance Parole application is pending adjudication and then mail it to the person outside the USA once it is approved.

USCIS have previously said this:


Response: Advance parole granted to those outside the U.S. is an extraordinary measure used sparingly to bring an otherwise inadmissible alien to the U.S. for a temporary period due to a compelling emergency or significant public benefit.

It is not to be used to circumvent the normal visa issuance process. Advance parole that is sought to preserve the pendency of an I-485 application must be applied for and granted before the alien’s departure from the U.S.

If the above non-immigrants filed adjustment applications prior to departing the U.S., they need not also have filed for advance parole where they have a valid NIV that may be presented at a port of entry. This of course assumes these same individuals have maintained their status (8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(C) and(D)). If, however, they have failed to maintain their non-immigrant status, advance parole must have been granted prior to their departure from the U.S. or their adjustment application shall be deemed abandoned.

If an H or L non-immigrant with a pending adjustment application appears at a port of entry and presents both an I-512 and his/her valid NIV, CBP should advise the alien that he or she must choose whether to use the H or L visa or the advance parole document.



Your wife can try to make an Infopass appointment to get an emergency Advance Parole document issued. The normal fees would apply and it would likely be valid for a single entry. She would have to provide evidence of the compelling or emergency circumstances warranting issue of the document.

If she chooses to leave before the Advance Parole is approved, then she could only return using an H4 visa (or other valid NIV).
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in Atlanta PERM Forum on 30 Dec 2017
Topic: Today's Stats from DOL

260 total 12/29/2017

Jul-16 ----- 1
Dec-16 ---- 2
Jan-17 ---- 1
Feb-17 ---- 4
Mar-17 ---- 8
Apr-17 --- 29
May-17 -- 15
Jun-17 --- 57
Jul-17 ---- 58
Aug-17 --- 85

Total ---- 260
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in I-131 (Advance Parole) Forum on 29 Dec 2017
Topic: Emergent Advance Parol

Does your wife have a valid H4 visa?

If your wife is maintaining H4 status, she can travel to Germany and return using a valid H4 visa without abandoning her pending AOS application.

She could go for an H4 visa stamping in Germany if necessary.

It's certainly an alternative to trying to get an emergency Advance parole document, albeit with a little risk if she needed to get an H4 visa stamped in Germany.
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in Atlanta PERM Forum on 29 Dec 2017
Topic: Today's Stats from DOL


I have the same question. does it mean if they complete a case, its either certified or rejected.
the Audited ones are not counted as completed?

You can see from the Selected Statistics that OFLC consider a case Processed (Completed in your terminology) if it is either:

Certified
Denied or
Withdrawn

As an average over the last 5 FY (FY2013 to FY2017) the % for each sub category of Processed cases is:

Certified -- 88.9% (India only - 91.9%)
Denied ----- 6.5% (India only - 4.3%)
Withdrawn - 4.6% (India only - 3.8%)

OFLC consider a case to still be In Process ( Active PERM Applications) if it is in:

Analyst Review (Initial Review when submitted)
Audit Review
Appeal
Sponsorship/BE (I think this may be the OFLC term for Supervised Recruitment - Just a guess)
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in Atlanta PERM Forum on 28 Dec 2017
Topic: Today's Stats from DOL

Should have read:

e.g. Q4 FY2017 shows 25,826 so the figure for July 2017, August 2017 and September 2017 would be 25,826 / 3 =~8,609 for each month.

I managed to erroneously put the Q4 FY2016 figure of 22,879 in the original post.
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in Atlanta PERM Forum on 28 Dec 2017
Topic: Today's Stats from DOL


Hey Kyan420,

Do you know how the % completed of the certified PERMS completed for a given month was completed by our other community member?

I am curious, what data source he is using?

Thanks!

I believe the data source is the Selected Statistics pdf documents. The FY2017 one can currently be found at https://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/Perf... and the FY2016 version is here currentlyhttps://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/Perf...

The number of received cases for a given month seems to be the total received for the quarter in the report divided by 3. e.g. Q4 FY2017 shows 22,879 so the figure for July 2017, August 2017 and September 2017 would be 22,879 / 3 =~8,609 for each month.

Taking the last set of figures showing % for 12/21/2017
2017-08 149 today 851 total ~9.89 % certified ~ 12.36 % done

851 / 8,609 is ~9.89% certified

There seems to be an assumption made that only 80% of received PERM are certified.

That gives 9.89% / 80 * 100 =~12.36% done

Only the person who compiles the figure can tell you for sure.
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in Atlanta PERM Forum on 28 Dec 2017
Topic: Today's Stats from DOL

163 total 12/27/2017

Feb-15 --- 1
Dec-15 --- 1
Aug-16 --- 3
Oct-16 --- 1
Jan-17 --- 1
Feb-17 --- 4
Mar-17 --- 4
Apr-17 --- 8
May-17 -- 8
Jun-17 -- 13
Jul-17 --- 65
Aug-17 -- 54

Total --- 163
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in Atlanta PERM Forum on 27 Dec 2017
Topic: Today's Stats from DOL

I get a different breakdown to the other poster.

258 Total 12/26/2017

Mar-16 ------ 1
Jan-17 ------ 2
Feb-17 ------ 5
Mar-17 ----- 14
Apr-17 ----- 25
May-17 ----- 0
Jun-17 ------ 7
Jul-17 ----- 82
Aug-17 --- 122

Total ------ 258
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in Atlanta PERM Forum on 23 Dec 2017
Topic: Today's Stats from DOL

291 total 12/22/2017

Aug-17 -- 125
Jul-17 ----- 66
Jun-17 ---- 30
May-17 --- 17
Apr-17 ---- 30
Mar-17 --- 17
Feb-17 ----- 3
Jan-17 ----- 1
Dec-16 ---- 0
Nov-16 ---- 0
Oct-16 ---- 0
Sep-16 ---- 0
Aug-16 ---- 0
Jul-16 ----- 0
Jun-16 ---- 0
May-16 --- 1
Apr-16 ---- 0
Mar-16 ---- 0
Feb-16 ---- 0
Jan-16 ---- 0
May-13 ---- 1

Total --- 291
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in Atlanta PERM Forum on 14 Dec 2017
Topic: Today's Stats from DOL

12/13/2017
266 total

2017-08 --- 67
2017-07 --- 46
2017-06 --- 80
2017-05 --- 22
2017-04 --- 34
2017-03 ---- 9
2017-02 ---- 4
2017-01 ---- 3
2016-07 ---- 1

Total ----- 266
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in Atlanta PERM Forum on 13 Dec 2017
Topic: Today's Stats from DOL

12/12/2017
223 total

2017-08 -- 125
2017-07 --- 61
2017-06 --- 13
2017-05 ---- 8
2017-04 ---- 8
2017-03 ---- 2
2017-02 ---- 1
2017-01 ---- 1
2016-12 ---- 0
2016-11 ---- 1
2016-10 ---- 0
2016-09 ---- 0
2016-08 ---- 1
2016-07 ---- 0
2016-06 ---- 0
2016-05 ---- 0
2016-04 ---- 0
2016-03 ---- 0
2016-02 ---- 0
2016-01 ---- 0
2015-10 ---- 1
2012-06 ---- 1

Total ------ 223

People can add them to the previous stats and calculate % if they wish.
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in I-485 Forum on 29 Nov 2017
Topic: H-1B extended for 1 year only - 485 pending


Hi Guys,

Posting this here even though it pertains to H1 but relates to 485 too.

My PD is current, 485 has already been filed and pending at the moment.

My H1 expires early next year and was recently filed for extension, but instead of the 3 years extension based on approved I-140, it got extended for 1 year only.

The lawyer explained it as "the 3-year extension based on approved I-140 petition is subject to the per country limitation. You have to prove that an immigrant visa is not available at the time your H-1B petition is filed. Since your priority date was current at the time of the H-1B filing, you are eligible for one year extensions on your H-1B status. "

Just want to confirm it this is true and actually works the way the lawyer mentioned it as above.

TIA,
Kumar



Your lawyer is entirely correct.

A 3 year extension is only available under AC21 104(c) if the beneficiary meets both the requirements of an approved I-140 and a retrogressed priority date at the time the extension request is filed.

A USCIS memo addresses this requirement https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/...


2. AC21 104(c) Guidance for Aliens Subject to Per Country Visa Limitations

Pursuant to AC21 §104(c), an alien is eligible for an extension of H-1B status if the alien is the beneficiary of an I-140 petition and would be eligible to be granted immigrant status but for the application of per country limitations applicable to immigrants under INA 203(b)(1), (2) or (3).

Despite the title of AC21 104(c), referring to "one-time" protection, USCIS may grant such H-1B extensions, in a maximum of three year increments, until such time as the alien’s application for adjustment of status has been processed and a decision made thereupon.

AC21 104(c) is applicable when an alien, who is the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, is eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status but for application of a per country limitation to which that alien is subject or, alternatively, if the immigrant preference category applicable to that alien is, as a whole, "unavailable".

Any petitioner seeking an H-1B extension on behalf of an H-1B alien beneficiary pursuant to AC21 104(c) must thus establish that at the time of filing for such extension, the alien is not eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status on account of the per country immigrant visa limitations or, alternatively, because the immigrant preference classification applicable to the alien is "unavailable".

In order to make a determination as to the H-1B alien beneficiary’s eligibility for an extension of H-1B status under the provisions of 104(c) of AC21, USCIS adjudicators are instructed to review the Department of State Immigrant Visa Bulletin that was in effect at the time of filing of the Form I-129 petition.

If, on the date of filing of the H-1B petition, the Visa Bulletin shows that the alien was subject to a per country or worldwide visa limitation in accordance with the alien’s immigrant visa "priority date", then the H-1B extension request under the provisions of 104(c) of AC21 may be granted.

To establish the alien’s priority date, USCIS may accept a copy of the H-1B alien beneficiary’s Form I-140 petition approval notice.


A 1 year extension under AC21 106(a) is still available if the beneficiary meets those requirements.
I don't like this postI like this post
Posted in H-1B Forum on 22 Nov 2017
Topic: L1 Max out applied for H4 with effective date -questions


2. Does her max out calculator reset if she is on H4 for one year and then can we apply for L1 or is staying out of country a must?


No. The 1 year qualifying period must be spent physically outside the USA.

8CFR 214.2(l)(12)(i)

(12) L-1 limitation on period of stay--

(i) Limits.

An alien who has spent five years in the United States in a specialized knowledge capacity or seven years in the United States in a managerial or executive capacity under section 101(a)(15) (L) and/or (H) of the Act may not be readmitted to the United States under section 101(a)(15) (L) or (H) of the Act unless the alien has resided and been physically present outside the United States, except for brief visits for business or pleasure, for the immediate prior year.

Such visits do not interrupt the one year abroad, but do not count towards fulfillment of that requirement.

In view of this restriction, a new individual petition may not be approved for an alien who has spent the maximum time period in the United States under section 101(a)(15) (L) and/or (H) of the Act, unless the alien has resided and been physically present outside the United States, except for brief visits for business or pleasure, for the immediate prior year.

The petitioner shall provide information about the alien's employment, place of residence, and the dates and purpose of any trips to the United States for the previous year.

A consular or Service officer may not grant L classification under a blanket petition to an alien who has spent five years in the United States as a professional with specialized knowledge or seven years in the United States as a manager or executive, unless the alien has met the requirements contained in this paragraph.

I don't like this postI like this post
1 2 3 4 5  Next »