以下是LAW：INS在国别和类别绿卡名额上,应遵从的eb2,eb3

从2006-2008 (见下)INS 的实际分配结果, 和他们应尊从的LAW (见LINK), 大家来看看,他们有没有在china born EB2, EB3 名额分配上错.



http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20AppA.pdf(ＬＡＷ　ＯＦ　分配原则)

２００６－２００８　实际分配结果．
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV(Part2).pdf

China India
EB-1 5,605 5,327
EB-2 6,965 14,819
EB-3 1,985 3,576

here is data for 2007
http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY07AnnualReportTableVp2.pdf
China India
EB-1 2,982 2,855 6,203
EB-2 6,797 6,203
EB-3 3,580 17,795

here is data for 2006
http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY06AnnualReportTableVIPart2.pdf
China India
EB-1 457 2163
EB-2 72 145
EB-3 1,016 422

所有跟帖： 

• 回复：以下是LAW：INS在国别和类别绿卡名额上,应遵从的eb2,eb3 -007dog- ♂ (305 bytes) () 12/09/2008 postreply 11:36:13

• 这里这么多作广告的律师,为何不出来解释一下??? -007dog- ♂ (0 bytes) () 12/09/2008 postreply 11:42:12

• 回复：以下是LAW：INS在国别和类别绿卡名额上,应遵从的eb2,eb3 -vivianflow- ♀ (154 bytes) () 12/09/2008 postreply 13:27:19

• In 2008, South Korea:15,373, China 14,724, India 24,354 -BM_July2ndfiler- ♂ (566 bytes) () 12/09/2008 postreply 13:30:41

• 回复：以下是LAW：INS在国别和类别绿卡名额上,应遵从的eb2,eb3 -sdfsdfsdff- ♀ (469 bytes) () 12/10/2008 postreply 08:16:14

• thanks,but if so, why 2006,2008 got big differnce -007dog- ♂ (78 bytes) () 12/10/2008 postreply 09:18:10

• 回复：thanks,but if so, why 2006,2008 got big differnce -sdfsdfsdff- ♀ (381 bytes) () 12/10/2008 postreply 10:49:32