S*******r
发帖数: 11017 | 1 EB3C搞不好要比EB2C早日CURRENT--才4000个pending case，自己份内名额2年就搞定了。
是不是考虑应该找个唐人街小公司花点钱办个EB3 hedge一下。。。大家怎么看？ |
h*******l
发帖数: 407 | |
t*********l
发帖数: 778 | 3 Eb3c 有相当部分不是走485的,而是在广州走cp的 |
n**********n
发帖数: 107 | 4 很不的是,国务院的排气规定是,单独国家的排气不能比ROW快,所以中国的EB3排气一直
和ROW差不多,2年实现Current是不可能的. |
g******c
发帖数: 218 | 5 If EB3C can't use 2500 due to EB3 ROW cutoff date, can the balance allocate
to EB2C? I think Mr. O used this to explain why EB2 Korea got so many quota
in FY09 and FY10. |
f*******e
发帖数: 4531 | 6 This is very good question. We should be prepared to ask this question to
make sure we don't waste our quota again.
allocate
quota
【在 g******c 的大作中提到】
: If EB3C can't use 2500 due to EB3 ROW cutoff date, can the balance allocate
: to EB2C? I think Mr. O used this to explain why EB2 Korea got so many quota
: in FY09 and FY10.
|
S*******r
发帖数: 11017 | 7 So the spillover will occur vertically(EB3C->EB2C) first rather than
horizontally(EB3C -> EB3 ROW), right?
allocate
quota
【在 g******c 的大作中提到】
: If EB3C can't use 2500 due to EB3 ROW cutoff date, can the balance allocate
: to EB2C? I think Mr. O used this to explain why EB2 Korea got so many quota
: in FY09 and FY10.
|
j*e
发帖数: 1987 | 8 就是说从上往下是Horizontal？（比如EB1ROW用不完给EB1C，EB1I，EB2ROW用不完给
EB2C，EB2I）
从下往上是Vertical?（EB3C用不完给EB2C，而不是给EB3ROW，EB3I用不完给EB2I，
EB3ROW不可能用不完） |
g******c
发帖数: 218 | 9 On the other side Mr. O will argue to consider FB and EB together. However
it is a legitimate question. We shall ask it anyway. |
