g*o
2 楼
请愿信发出去好几个礼拜了，没想到今天收到某个议员办公室的详细回信。看来他们把
信发给了DOS且收到对方的回答。我的理解基本大意就是每个国家的份额只有上限没有
下限所以怎么分都OK。下面是具体回信，请对这方面比较懂的同学帮我想想怎么回信反
驳。
Dear xxx,
Thank you for writing to the Congressman about the allocation of visa
numbers. I hope the below response from the Department of State will help
you understand how the system works.
Thanks again for writing and please let us know whenever you our office can
be of assistance to you and your family.
Margaret:
Thank you for contacting VisaNet.
We are familiar with this inquiry. Here is the response:
Please review ‘Section D’ of the attached document. The Immigration and
Nationality Act (INA) does not guarantee any country a minimum number of
visa that must be issued, however a limit is set so a country may not exceed
a certain amount. Therefore, visas issued under a limit is completely
acceptable within the provision of the INA. Please review the following:
D. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON 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, a significant amount of demand is
received each month for applicants who have priority dates which are
significantly earlier than the applicable cut-off dates. In addition,
fluctuations in demand 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% 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.
Applicability of Section 202(a)(5): INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the
American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act, removed the per-country
limit on Employment-based immigrants in any calendar quarter in which
applicant demand for numbers in one or more Employment-based preferences is
less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the
application of Section 202(a)(5) has allowed countries such as China –
mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and
Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused. Such
numbers are provided strictly in priority date order without regard to the
foreign state chargeability, and the same cut-off date applies to any
country benefiting from this provision.
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 an
earlier cut-off date 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.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, “2) Per country levels for family-
sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4),
and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of
any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of
section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of
a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of
the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that
fiscal year.” The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)
(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based
numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that
during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country
will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and
Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered
oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject
to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of
a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable
to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical
limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to
the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)
(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of
the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7
.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked
sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the
Family preferences.)
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.
We hope you find this information helpful.
Sincerely,
VisaNet Congressional Liaison Specialist
Office of Public and Diplomatic Liaison
Visa Office, Bureau of Consular Affairs
U.S. Department of State
Washington, D.C. 20520
Margaret Cavanaugh
Constituent Services Director
信发给了DOS且收到对方的回答。我的理解基本大意就是每个国家的份额只有上限没有
下限所以怎么分都OK。下面是具体回信，请对这方面比较懂的同学帮我想想怎么回信反
驳。
Dear xxx,
Thank you for writing to the Congressman about the allocation of visa
numbers. I hope the below response from the Department of State will help
you understand how the system works.
Thanks again for writing and please let us know whenever you our office can
be of assistance to you and your family.
Margaret:
Thank you for contacting VisaNet.
We are familiar with this inquiry. Here is the response:
Please review ‘Section D’ of the attached document. The Immigration and
Nationality Act (INA) does not guarantee any country a minimum number of
visa that must be issued, however a limit is set so a country may not exceed
a certain amount. Therefore, visas issued under a limit is completely
acceptable within the provision of the INA. Please review the following:
D. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON 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, a significant amount of demand is
received each month for applicants who have priority dates which are
significantly earlier than the applicable cut-off dates. In addition,
fluctuations in demand 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% 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.
Applicability of Section 202(a)(5): INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the
American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act, removed the per-country
limit on Employment-based immigrants in any calendar quarter in which
applicant demand for numbers in one or more Employment-based preferences is
less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the
application of Section 202(a)(5) has allowed countries such as China –
mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and
Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused. Such
numbers are provided strictly in priority date order without regard to the
foreign state chargeability, and the same cut-off date applies to any
country benefiting from this provision.
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 an
earlier cut-off date 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.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, “2) Per country levels for family-
sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4),
and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of
any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of
section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of
a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of
the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that
fiscal year.” The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)
(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based
numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that
during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country
will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and
Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered
oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject
to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of
a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable
to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical
limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to
the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)
(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of
the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7
.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked
sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the
Family preferences.)
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.
We hope you find this information helpful.
Sincerely,
VisaNet Congressional Liaison Specialist
Office of Public and Diplomatic Liaison
Visa Office, Bureau of Consular Affairs
U.S. Department of State
Washington, D.C. 20520
Margaret Cavanaugh
Constituent Services Director
c*a
3 楼
有.
【在 S*******p 的大作中提到】
: 这个公司怎么样？最近在招人么？
: 最近裁人没有？
: http://www.powerwave.com/
: 多谢
【在 S*******p 的大作中提到】
: 这个公司怎么样？最近在招人么？
: 最近裁人没有？
: http://www.powerwave.com/
: 多谢
m*o
4 楼
顶
怎么反驳
怎么反驳
c*l
5 楼
I got the same email from the same person, I tried to use the data explain
the 27% is for eb category as a whole, she then told me again the 7% cap per
country.
the 27% is for eb category as a whole, she then told me again the 7% cap per
country.
H*i
6 楼
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/EB23/31436571.html
【在 m****o 的大作中提到】
: 顶
: 怎么反驳
【在 m****o 的大作中提到】
: 顶
: 怎么反驳
c*l
7 楼
Have you replied already? If you have, I probably skip this time.
can
【在 g****o 的大作中提到】
: 请愿信发出去好几个礼拜了，没想到今天收到某个议员办公室的详细回信。看来他们把
: 信发给了DOS且收到对方的回答。我的理解基本大意就是每个国家的份额只有上限没有
: 下限所以怎么分都OK。下面是具体回信，请对这方面比较懂的同学帮我想想怎么回信反
: 驳。
: Dear xxx,
: Thank you for writing to the Congressman about the allocation of visa
: numbers. I hope the below response from the Department of State will help
: you understand how the system works.
: Thanks again for writing and please let us know whenever you our office can
: be of assistance to you and your family.
can
【在 g****o 的大作中提到】
: 请愿信发出去好几个礼拜了，没想到今天收到某个议员办公室的详细回信。看来他们把
: 信发给了DOS且收到对方的回答。我的理解基本大意就是每个国家的份额只有上限没有
: 下限所以怎么分都OK。下面是具体回信，请对这方面比较懂的同学帮我想想怎么回信反
: 驳。
: Dear xxx,
: Thank you for writing to the Congressman about the allocation of visa
: numbers. I hope the below response from the Department of State will help
: you understand how the system works.
: Thanks again for writing and please let us know whenever you our office can
: be of assistance to you and your family.
g*o
8 楼
No i have not replied to her yet. I am checking out the link helsinki
provided and will reply to her with our arguments.
provided and will reply to her with our arguments.
d*p
9 楼
这个是无法反驳的，因为dos没有任何违规。
能做的只能是请求改变规则，而这根本不是你个人请愿信能达到的效果，只有lobbying
才行，但是lobbying又是中国ebers/组织不想玩或者说玩不起的.......
能做的只能是请求改变规则，而这根本不是你个人请愿信能达到的效果，只有lobbying
才行，但是lobbying又是中国ebers/组织不想玩或者说玩不起的.......
c*l
10 楼
I have sent to her already, she hasn't replied yet, maybe won't.
【在 g****o 的大作中提到】
: No i have not replied to her yet. I am checking out the link helsinki
: provided and will reply to her with our arguments.
【在 g****o 的大作中提到】
: No i have not replied to her yet. I am checking out the link helsinki
: provided and will reply to her with our arguments.
相关阅读
140批后H1转F2可行吗?求教：博士期间交了niw 140还有可能拿到cpt吗RFE 到底都有哪些种类？RFE发到公司律师那里去了，正常吗？LCA不是7天就好吗? 有谁很久才拿到LCA的?140 eb2交上去快2个月了,为什么还是没有消息呢?2011.3的PD，要不要跳槽？rfe回复后多久online状态变成review?H1b transfer两个工作之间能overlap吗?关于 EB3 CP demand 探讨case转到local office的xdjm们来确认一个说法吧。（cross fingers）20伪币答谢！刚面试一个阿三，EAD刚过180天用ead和AP COMBO 卡 和填i94表问题1月底交的485， 6个月了还是ACCEPTANCE找律师最关键是否perm阶段?3012 is dead now or what?IV的人联系我了关于非法移民EAD的争论反应了移民和政策制定者的disconnectFY12 EB类总名额应该增加到14万5