MDix
08-22 09:32 PM
Simple English : EB2 will be more tough. They do have same strict guideline for EB1 also. If implemented then it will be tough to get EB2.
E21(EB2):
5. Paragraph (2)(A) of Chapter 22.2(j) of the AFM is revised to read as follows:
(A) Evaluation of Evidence Submitted in Support of a Petition for an Alien of Exceptional Ability. 8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(ii) provides that, in order to show the requisite exceptional ability, the petition must be accompanied by at least three of six criteria (set forth in 8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(ii)). ISOs should use a two-part analysis where the evidence is first counted and then considered in the context of a final merits determination.
Part One: Evaluate Whether the Evidence Provided Meets at Least Three E21 Alien of Exceptional Ability Criteria. You must make a determination regarding whether the evidence submitted in the petition meets at least three criteria at 8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(ii). Note: While ISOs must consider the quality and caliber of the evidence to determine whether a particular regulatory criterion has been met, the ISO should not make a determination relative to the alien�s claimed exceptional ability in Part One of the case analysis.
(i) An official academic record showing that the alien has a degree, diploma, certificate, or similar award from a college, university, school, or other institution of learning relating to the area of exceptional ability;
(ii) Evidence in the form of letter(s) from current or former employer(s) showing that the alien has at least ten years of full-time experience in the occupation for which he or she is being sought;
(iii) A license to practice the profession or certification for a particular profession or occupation;
(iv) Evidence that the alien has commanded a salary, or other remuneration for services, which demonstrates exceptional ability;
Note: To satisfy this criterion, the evidence must show that the alien has commanded a salary or remuneration for services that is indicative of his or her claimed exceptional ability relative to others working in the field.
(v) Evidence of membership in professional associations; or
(vi) Evidence of recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field by peers, governmental entities, or professional or business organizations.
Evaluation of Evidentiary Criteria in Certain Form I-140 Petitions (AFM Update AD 10-41)
Page 16
(vii) If the above standards do not readily apply to the beneficiary's occupation, the petitioner may submit comparable evidence to establish the beneficiary's eligibility.
8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(iii) provides that petitioners may submit �comparable evidence� to establish an alien�s eligibility in cases where the standards set forth in 8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(ii) do not apply. In cases where such comparable evidence is submitted, it is reasonable to require the petitioner to explain why 8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(ii) does not apply.
Part One: Evaluative Determination. The determination in Part One of the analysis is limited whether the evidence submitted satisfies at least three of the criteria at 8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(ii) or the comparable evidence criterion in 8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(iii). After determining that, by a preponderance of the evidence, those criteria have been met, the ISO should move on to Part Two of the analysis to make a separate merits-based determination of eligibility based on the totality of evidence presented.
Part Two: Final Merits Determination. Meeting the minimum requirement by providing evidence three of the regulatory criteria does not, in itself, establish that the alien in fact meets the requirements for classification as an alien of exceptional ability under section 203(b)(2) of the INA. In Part Two of the analysis, you must consider all of the evidence to make a final merit determination of whether or not the petitioner has, by a preponderance of the evidence, shown that the beneficiary is at a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered. Therefore, evidence submitted to establish exceptional ability must somehow place the alien above others in the field in order to fulfill the criteria; qualifications possessed by most members of a given field cannot demonstrate a degree of expertise "significantly above that ordinarily encountered." Note that section 203(b)(2)(C) of INA provides that mere possession of a degree, diploma, certificate or similar award from a college, university school or other institution of learning shall not by itself be considered sufficient evidence of exceptional ability. To meet the criterion set forth in 8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(F), formal recognition in the form of certificates and other documentation that are contemporaneous with the alien�s claimed contributions and achievements may have more weight than letters prepared for the petition "recognizing" the alien's achievements.
6. The existing text of paragraph (2)(B) of Chapter 22.2(j) of the AFM is removed and the paragraph is reserved.
7. Technical Correction: The thirteenth paragraph in Chapter 22.2(b)(5)(B) of the AFM is revised to read as follows:
For successor-in-interest purposes, the transfer of ownership may occur at any time after the filing of the original labor certification with DOL.
Evaluation of Evidentiary Criteria in Certain Form I-140 Petitions (AFM Update AD 10-41)
Page 17
8. Technical Correction: The DOL email address to use to request duplicate approved labor certifications from DOL in paragraphs (9) and (10) of Chapter 22.2(b) of the AFM is revised (in both paragraphs) to read as follows:
The duplicate
E21(EB2):
5. Paragraph (2)(A) of Chapter 22.2(j) of the AFM is revised to read as follows:
(A) Evaluation of Evidence Submitted in Support of a Petition for an Alien of Exceptional Ability. 8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(ii) provides that, in order to show the requisite exceptional ability, the petition must be accompanied by at least three of six criteria (set forth in 8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(ii)). ISOs should use a two-part analysis where the evidence is first counted and then considered in the context of a final merits determination.
Part One: Evaluate Whether the Evidence Provided Meets at Least Three E21 Alien of Exceptional Ability Criteria. You must make a determination regarding whether the evidence submitted in the petition meets at least three criteria at 8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(ii). Note: While ISOs must consider the quality and caliber of the evidence to determine whether a particular regulatory criterion has been met, the ISO should not make a determination relative to the alien�s claimed exceptional ability in Part One of the case analysis.
(i) An official academic record showing that the alien has a degree, diploma, certificate, or similar award from a college, university, school, or other institution of learning relating to the area of exceptional ability;
(ii) Evidence in the form of letter(s) from current or former employer(s) showing that the alien has at least ten years of full-time experience in the occupation for which he or she is being sought;
(iii) A license to practice the profession or certification for a particular profession or occupation;
(iv) Evidence that the alien has commanded a salary, or other remuneration for services, which demonstrates exceptional ability;
Note: To satisfy this criterion, the evidence must show that the alien has commanded a salary or remuneration for services that is indicative of his or her claimed exceptional ability relative to others working in the field.
(v) Evidence of membership in professional associations; or
(vi) Evidence of recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field by peers, governmental entities, or professional or business organizations.
Evaluation of Evidentiary Criteria in Certain Form I-140 Petitions (AFM Update AD 10-41)
Page 16
(vii) If the above standards do not readily apply to the beneficiary's occupation, the petitioner may submit comparable evidence to establish the beneficiary's eligibility.
8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(iii) provides that petitioners may submit �comparable evidence� to establish an alien�s eligibility in cases where the standards set forth in 8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(ii) do not apply. In cases where such comparable evidence is submitted, it is reasonable to require the petitioner to explain why 8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(ii) does not apply.
Part One: Evaluative Determination. The determination in Part One of the analysis is limited whether the evidence submitted satisfies at least three of the criteria at 8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(ii) or the comparable evidence criterion in 8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(iii). After determining that, by a preponderance of the evidence, those criteria have been met, the ISO should move on to Part Two of the analysis to make a separate merits-based determination of eligibility based on the totality of evidence presented.
Part Two: Final Merits Determination. Meeting the minimum requirement by providing evidence three of the regulatory criteria does not, in itself, establish that the alien in fact meets the requirements for classification as an alien of exceptional ability under section 203(b)(2) of the INA. In Part Two of the analysis, you must consider all of the evidence to make a final merit determination of whether or not the petitioner has, by a preponderance of the evidence, shown that the beneficiary is at a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered. Therefore, evidence submitted to establish exceptional ability must somehow place the alien above others in the field in order to fulfill the criteria; qualifications possessed by most members of a given field cannot demonstrate a degree of expertise "significantly above that ordinarily encountered." Note that section 203(b)(2)(C) of INA provides that mere possession of a degree, diploma, certificate or similar award from a college, university school or other institution of learning shall not by itself be considered sufficient evidence of exceptional ability. To meet the criterion set forth in 8 CFR 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(F), formal recognition in the form of certificates and other documentation that are contemporaneous with the alien�s claimed contributions and achievements may have more weight than letters prepared for the petition "recognizing" the alien's achievements.
6. The existing text of paragraph (2)(B) of Chapter 22.2(j) of the AFM is removed and the paragraph is reserved.
7. Technical Correction: The thirteenth paragraph in Chapter 22.2(b)(5)(B) of the AFM is revised to read as follows:
For successor-in-interest purposes, the transfer of ownership may occur at any time after the filing of the original labor certification with DOL.
Evaluation of Evidentiary Criteria in Certain Form I-140 Petitions (AFM Update AD 10-41)
Page 17
8. Technical Correction: The DOL email address to use to request duplicate approved labor certifications from DOL in paragraphs (9) and (10) of Chapter 22.2(b) of the AFM is revised (in both paragraphs) to read as follows:
The duplicate
wallpaper quotes about pain. emo quotes about pain. quotes
vandanaverdia
09-12 02:00 PM
Thank you rangaswamy. We need more members to come forward & be first time contributors!!
We have lots to achieve & very few days left...
Support IV....
Help IV help you!!!
We have lots to achieve & very few days left...
Support IV....
Help IV help you!!!
meridiani.planum
09-11 11:29 PM
Can one even file a lawsuit against USCIS ?? :D
this is the United States. You can file a lawsuit against ANYONE :D
this is the United States. You can file a lawsuit against ANYONE :D
2011 hair Embrace Pain | Sympathy Quotes quotes about pain. quotes on sadness and
kingkon_2000
07-11 10:22 AM
My guess is that they moved the dates so that any one missed the train in jul 2007 will be able to file 485 and/or add spouses to the existing applications. Looks like it will remain there for some time atleast, may be till the year end.
NJOY Eb2 guys.
Now the Jul/07 filers will not receive 2 yrs EAD since the PD is current and there is very less chance that they will receive GC. So USCIS plays a good game.. they will have more chance next year to milk money from Jul07 filers as they will have to renew EAD/AP again next year...
NJOY Eb2 guys.
Now the Jul/07 filers will not receive 2 yrs EAD since the PD is current and there is very less chance that they will receive GC. So USCIS plays a good game.. they will have more chance next year to milk money from Jul07 filers as they will have to renew EAD/AP again next year...
more...
gcisadawg
03-04 12:16 PM
Doesnt seem like anything is cooking at TSC! I-140 and I-485 still shows
"On Oct 1st 2007 we received....blah blah blah...."
-GCisaDawg
"On Oct 1st 2007 we received....blah blah blah...."
-GCisaDawg
NKR
04-03 08:13 AM
First, try to ask the question properly with specifics. It could easily be understood the way I understood it. U ask a dumb question and u get a dumb answer . Also, there was never any sort of communication between ssnd and myself. That itself shows who's dumb.
Looks like all the dumb ppl r getting lots of green dots. Amazing forum...IV ki jai.
Oh, you couldn�t grasp the obvious and telling me that my question had to be more specific and on top of that you agree that your answer was dumb, lol. No wonder you are dumb.
BTW ssnd and I are not rude in calling you dumb. It�s ok to call a spade a spade.
The bagel is tasting soooo good this morning, yummy�
Looks like all the dumb ppl r getting lots of green dots. Amazing forum...IV ki jai.
Oh, you couldn�t grasp the obvious and telling me that my question had to be more specific and on top of that you agree that your answer was dumb, lol. No wonder you are dumb.
BTW ssnd and I are not rude in calling you dumb. It�s ok to call a spade a spade.
The bagel is tasting soooo good this morning, yummy�
more...
evalle
05-10 02:57 PM
August 2002. Got the 45 days later but not the approval.:confused:
2010 hair quotes on sadness and pain. emo quotes about pain. quotes about
bskrishna
07-11 12:04 PM
heres the thing..we have been talking about the 2004 hump for eb2 for a while now. if you download the perm data from 2005 you will see only 7000+ PERM approvals for India. this included a significant number of EB3 other worker categories like pipe welder, cook, etc ( i am assuming they were eb3 -other worker...correct me if i m wrong)
this was the breakdown per month for perm 2005
March-1
April -13
May-72
June-324
July-351
Aug-833
Sept-1172
Oct-1212
Nov-1541
Dec-1771
7290 - includes everybody - eb2, eb3, eb3 other workers
the whole question was the hump of 2004-march2005
ithis is the first time since when retrogression started on oct 1 2005, that the dates have moved beyond 2005.
do we have any such nos for 04? ideally 05 EB2 should buzz through adjudication in less then a quarter.
this was the breakdown per month for perm 2005
March-1
April -13
May-72
June-324
July-351
Aug-833
Sept-1172
Oct-1212
Nov-1541
Dec-1771
7290 - includes everybody - eb2, eb3, eb3 other workers
the whole question was the hump of 2004-march2005
ithis is the first time since when retrogression started on oct 1 2005, that the dates have moved beyond 2005.
do we have any such nos for 04? ideally 05 EB2 should buzz through adjudication in less then a quarter.
more...
sprajulu
09-10 04:42 PM
Friends
We need to write letters to USCIS directors and inform them about USICS senseless activities like issueing the G cards to latter PD's and not touching the older PD files
more and more letters should be send so that they will realize atleast for future visas. other wise older PD people won't get GC's for ever
We need to write letters to USCIS directors and inform them about USICS senseless activities like issueing the G cards to latter PD's and not touching the older PD files
more and more letters should be send so that they will realize atleast for future visas. other wise older PD people won't get GC's for ever
hair emo pain quotes Pictures,
ramkigr@hotmail.com
04-17 09:58 AM
HSBC denied my refinance application because of EAD status. They said EAD is not one of the statuses they accept. They needed either H1B or GC status. I lost my $325 rate locking fee, not sure what else my real estate attorney is going to charge me because of this denial. I am in the process of talking to other banks.
Hope this helps someone not to loose money.
Hope this helps someone not to loose money.
more...
franklin
07-20 06:19 PM
Correct me if I am wrong, ---but I thought that "This Ammendment" was attached to a defence bill. I dont think that it was the ammendment that was shot down, but the whole defence beill.
That is exactly what I thought as well. Which is why I'm confused by posters ranting about "people who voted against SKIL bill" and getting their knickers in a twist
That is exactly what I thought as well. Which is why I'm confused by posters ranting about "people who voted against SKIL bill" and getting their knickers in a twist
hot hair love and pain quotes. sad
qualified_trash
06-01 10:00 AM
she is not stupid!! she is right. Your GC and H1 is being sponsored by the employer not by you. All documents etc are indeed the property of the employer. It is the employer's responsibility to keep you updated of any changes in your status.
more...
house emo quotes about pain. quotes; quotes about pain. quotes about pain and
a_yaja
07-21 09:06 AM
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
Enzi - Yea
Gregg - Yea
Smith - Yea
Sununu - Yea
Coleman - Yea
Voinovich - Nay
Everyone who cosponsored the amendment voted for the amendment except for Voinovich. Wonder why he cosponsored the amendment if he did not vote for it.
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
Enzi - Yea
Gregg - Yea
Smith - Yea
Sununu - Yea
Coleman - Yea
Voinovich - Nay
Everyone who cosponsored the amendment voted for the amendment except for Voinovich. Wonder why he cosponsored the amendment if he did not vote for it.
tattoo sad emo quotes about love.
polapragada
09-14 05:32 PM
That is exactly the point. How can you then argue that all PD porting is unethical, period?
There should be a clause that when porting of PD is being issued, Like "At the time of EB3 Labor was the person eligible for EB2"! Thats the whole point ..
No one will have problems with that except some posers
What Say??
There should be a clause that when porting of PD is being issued, Like "At the time of EB3 Labor was the person eligible for EB2"! Thats the whole point ..
No one will have problems with that except some posers
What Say??
more...
pictures quotes on pain. emo quotes
cpbaherwani
06-03 11:29 AM
Mailed a check for $100 today.
dresses emo quotes about pain. i love
kondur_007
12-16 11:04 AM
Wishful thinking aside - realistically speaking, it's zilch. As USCIS seems to have predicted, even with spillover implemented the PD isn't moving to 2006 any time soon.
jazz
I have been intending to post this for a while: I still have major doubts on the predictions made by DOS. We all are grateful to them to at least do an effort to provide such predictions, but things don't add up.
It is everyone's understanding that these predictions are based on the information about "preadjudicated applications" from USCIS. Now if you look at the total number of preadjudicated applications from what USCIS has published, it seems that PD (for EB2 India) will move to at least to 2007 if not 2008 by the end of fiscal year 2010. There are no new 485 filings (except for EB1 and EB2 ROW) and unless there is a "HUGE" increase in these categories, there is no other way to explain the basis for these predictions.
Someone else mentioned in this thread about the large number of filings in 2005 due to PERM, but remember, this should already be accounted for in USCIS's preadjudicated numbers.
So either these DOS predictions are some form of scare technique, or too much conservative estimate (so as not to disappoint people) or there is a missing piece of information that we have no clue about.
In any case, I do not claim to be a "better predictor" than DOS; but reality is that all these are pedictions and we have to wait till July-Sept 2010 to find out the truth.
Hoping for the best....:)
jazz
I have been intending to post this for a while: I still have major doubts on the predictions made by DOS. We all are grateful to them to at least do an effort to provide such predictions, but things don't add up.
It is everyone's understanding that these predictions are based on the information about "preadjudicated applications" from USCIS. Now if you look at the total number of preadjudicated applications from what USCIS has published, it seems that PD (for EB2 India) will move to at least to 2007 if not 2008 by the end of fiscal year 2010. There are no new 485 filings (except for EB1 and EB2 ROW) and unless there is a "HUGE" increase in these categories, there is no other way to explain the basis for these predictions.
Someone else mentioned in this thread about the large number of filings in 2005 due to PERM, but remember, this should already be accounted for in USCIS's preadjudicated numbers.
So either these DOS predictions are some form of scare technique, or too much conservative estimate (so as not to disappoint people) or there is a missing piece of information that we have no clue about.
In any case, I do not claim to be a "better predictor" than DOS; but reality is that all these are pedictions and we have to wait till July-Sept 2010 to find out the truth.
Hoping for the best....:)
more...
makeup sad quotes about life and
reedandbamboo
09-12 07:20 AM
while you'll contemplate raising the funds and resources for the lawsuit AND try to figure out the rationale for the reverse movement in dates AND while you'll ponder the unfairness of it all, please visit this thread and join us in VOICING OUR DISSATISFACTION:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21340
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21340
girlfriend dresses Emo love quotes #14
kumhyd2
07-18 02:51 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=123353#post123353
hairstyles Carol – Fire Of Pain
himu73
09-09 11:44 AM
Good analysis. How long did you take to put this together this comparison?
Sorry wrong post
Sorry wrong post
continuedProgress
12-28 10:40 AM
Canceled flight tix and continuing wait for AP filed on 8/2. (receipted on 8/24, if that matters)
shi120,
In case you have not seen it, I have sent you a PM.
Thanks
shi120,
In case you have not seen it, I have sent you a PM.
Thanks
Kodi
07-12 02:49 PM
Did anyone here get their PERM LC approved from Atlanta recently? They seem to have started processing.
No comments:
Post a Comment