My version of emails based on cityzhuzhu's, Hurry up!

Department Of State: [e-mail]

An organization supervises DOS: [e-mail]

Nancy Pelosi (House Speaker): [e-mail]

Zoe Lofgren (Chairwoman of the house immigration committee): [e-mail]

Senator Leahy (Chairman of the senate immigration committee):

[e-mail]



Dear Sir/Madam:

I am writing to strongly express my deepest concern regarding the most recent Visa Bulletin (for April 2008) posted on the U.S. Department of State website on March 13, 2008.

According to this Visa Bulletin, all potentially unused Visa numbers from Employment-based category 2 are only made available to Indian applicants rather than the applicants from other countries whose cutoff dates are not current (currently only India and China are affect by these cutoff dates; this unfair relocation of the unused Visa numbers could be seen clearly in Attachment 2).

Apparently, this new Visa Bulletin shows us two messages as followings:

1. Any unused Employment-based visa numbers can be re-used to apply on one country’s visa number in the same category if a country’s per-country limit has been reached.

2. Among more than 180 countries around the world, only one country is the subject to this favorable treatment and this country is India.


This is a serious issue of discrimination and unfairness, even possible unlawfulness, to all the hardworking and legal taxpayers from other countries including myself. Any irresponsible actions taken by the DOS will again put their reputation in jeopardy, which was already ruined by the chaos in last July.

Equality is one of the most important guiding principles in the United States. I believe the United States government would follow these principles and show that it is clear of any discriminatory acts by revising bulletin so that it does not contain any element could become under the scrutiny of justice for favoring one country over others.

I sincerely request an immediate explanation and an immediate correction on this matter.

Thank you very much for your consideration!

Best Regards

Attachment 1: Section D of the April 2008 Visa Bulletin:

D. INDIA EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY

Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual “per-country” limit. It has been determined that based on the current level of demand being received, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices, there would be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment Second preference category. As a result, numbers have once again become available to the India Employment Second preference category. The rate of number use in the Employment Second preference category will continue to be monitored, and it may be necessary to make adjustments should the level of demand increase substantially.

Attachment 2: Comparison of Employment Second Preference Visa Availability between India and China on the resent months’ Visa Bulletin from the DOS:

India China
November 2007 01APR04 01JAN06
December 2007 01JAN02 01JAN03
January 2008 01JAN00 01JAN03
February 2008 U 01JAN03
March 2008 U 01DEC03
April 2008 01DEC03 01DEC03

所有跟帖： 

• Somebody told me that the subject is "Protest State Department's -sgwaitgc- ♀ (0 bytes) () 03/14/2008 postreply 10:26:56

• I think that the subject wording should be a little different. -happyxie- ♀ (0 bytes) () 03/14/2008 postreply 10:34:49

• my subject: Unfair Visa Bulletin -cityzhuzhu- ♂ (0 bytes) () 03/14/2008 postreply 10:38:07

• or Unfair Visa Bulletin for Chinese! 回複：my subject: Unfair Visa -happyxie- ♀ (0 bytes) () 03/14/2008 postreply 10:41:46

• forgot to mention, my subject is: unfairness of the April 2008 V -sdsd- ♀ (76 bytes) () 03/14/2008 postreply 10:48:05

• Just sent the email out -wenlin- ♀ (0 bytes) () 03/14/2008 postreply 12:04:38

• I doubt anybody will look at the content of the email. -sgwaitgc- ♀ (119 bytes) () 03/14/2008 postreply 13:23:04