EB2 Predictions (Rather Calculations) - 2012

[openaccount]

Guys

To clear EB2I till Dec07 with current pending inventory 6072 are needed. As dates are going to stay U for Eb2I till Oct2012 when CO has to move dates in Oct atleast 70% of 6072(this could increase if USCIS continues pre-ajudication at current pace)-- 4250 will show up in demand data. Because of what happened this year there might(at this point we can say there won't be any) not be QSP, by the time CO decides to move dates further later in Fy2013 to consume little SO 90% of 6072--5464 will show up in demand data and of those 5464 only 2800 will be approved so still 2664 priior to Dec2007 will be waiting in queue. And this is without adding any EB3-EB2 porting if you add that number it will be close 6k-8k so just to clear Dec2007 we need atleast 7k SO from EB1/EB5/EB4 & EB2ROW if it provides any.

P.S: I am also not happy with these numbers as my PD is May 2008 and it may take at least 2 years to reach that date if current numbers/data trend continues

[feedmyback]

Anyways everything that's happening beats the logic. So with no proper facts to support, I am putting one scenario that comes to my mind. I want Gurus to tell if that could be a possibility.

Suppose if EB2ROW has a cut off date of say 01-01-2011 for the entire FY 2013 (This is purely based on the fact that USCIS can put any date for any category because of lack of transparency). Now, if there were any spillover from EB1, EB4 and Eb5 during FY 2013, would that all go to EB2IC as they are the most backlogged?

Some how I get a feeling that there is an internal agenda to make all EB2 WW move at one pace and remove discrepancies (A slight variant of HR3012 being internally implemented unofficially :))). I know it is just wishful thinking. But can any one throw some light on that possibility at least?

[murali83]

Guys

To clear EB2I till Dec07 with current pending inventory 6072 are needed. As dates are going to stay U for Eb2I till Oct2012 when CO has to move dates in Oct atleast 70% of 6072(this could increase if USCIS continues pre-ajudication at current pace)-- 4250 will show up in demand data. Because of what happened this year there might(at this point we can say there won't be any) not be QSP, by the time CO decides to move dates further later in Fy2013 to consume little SO 90% of 6072--5464 will show up in demand data and of those 5464 only 2800 will be approved so still 2664 priior to Dec2007 will be waiting in queue. And this is without adding any EB3-EB2 porting if you add that number it will be close 6k-8k so just to clear Dec2007 we need atleast 7k SO from EB1/EB5/EB4 & EB2ROW if it provides any.

P.S: I am also not happy with these numbers as my PD is May 2008 and it may take at least 2 years to reach that date if current numbers/data trend continues

You are about right.

EB2 China will straightaway go to July 2008 in Oct 2012 if CO allots them their yearly quota in the beginning of the year. When the spillover session starts, since SOFAD is given according to PD's irrespective of the nation in the retrogressed category, I guess all the sofad will come to EB2-I.

If we add some optimism and say
1. Porting maybe just 3-3.5K (So by Last quarter of FY 2013, we will have maybe 6K pending cases before dec 2007 ready for approval)
2. They typically just approve only 80% of the cases (that makes it 4.8K).

So IF we get a 10K sofad, we will still have 5.2K visas for EB2-I in FY 2013. That could get us to around May 2008 dates.

Now getting that 10K sofad might be pretty tough. From Veni's stats, it looks like EB2-ROW might not yield much next year. So better to calculate SOFAD just from EB1, EB4 and 5. I do believe that can reach 10K. The good part is even if EB2-ROW retrogresses on account of its own demand next year, during the spillover, EB2-I will get all the sofad since we have the most backed up PD's. If Eb2-row gives something that is a bonus.

So I think May 2008 can get greened in Fy 2013.

[openaccount]

You are about right.

EB2 China will straightaway go to July 2008 in Oct 2012 if CO allots them their yearly quota in the beginning of the year. When the spillover session starts, since SOFAD is given according to PD's irrespective of the nation in the retrogressed category, I guess all the sofad will come to EB2-I.

If we add some optimism and say
1. Porting maybe just 3-3.5K (So by Last quarter of FY 2013, we will have maybe 6K pending cases before dec 2007 ready for approval)
2. They typically just approve only 80% of the cases (that makes it 4.8K).

So IF we get a 10K sofad, we will still have 5.2K visas for EB2-I in FY 2013. That could get us to around May 2008 dates.

Now getting that 10K sofad might be pretty tough. From Veni's stats, it looks like EB2-ROW might not yield much next year. So better to calculate SOFAD just from EB1, EB4 and 5. I do believe that can reach 10K. The good part is even if EB2-ROW retrogresses on account of its own demand next year, during the spillover, EB2-I will get all the sofad since we have the most backed up PD's. If Eb2-row gives something that is a bonus.

So I think May 2008 can get greened in Fy 2013.

murali-

I think EB2ROW dates should be current, for EB2IC to get any SO from EB1/EB4/EB5 isn't that true? I may be wrong.

If CO wants to apply SO to IC instead of ROW i don't see why he would favor one group over another.For this to happen CO has to repeat similar to what he did earlier this year again next year but during second half of FY2013 when Spill Over starts, move dates drastically for EB2IC and apply SO and then make dates U for entire EB2, I doubt if he will do that, but again anything is possible with DOS/USIC, we won't know until it happens.

[murali83]

murali-

I think EB2ROW dates should be current, for EB2IC to get any SO from EB1/EB4/EB5 isn't that true? I may be wrong.

If CO wants to apply SO to IC instead of ROW i don't see why he would favor one group over another.For this to happen CO has to repeat similar to what he did earlier this year again next year but during second half of FY2013 when Spill Over starts, move dates drastically for EB2IC and apply SO and then make dates U for entire EB2, I doubt if he will do that, but again anything is possible with DOS/USIC, we won't know until it happens.

openaccount,

Let me clarify myself,

Starting FY 2013 Eb2-row will become current on its own account. Lets saying during the year, EB2-ROW(M&P included) have a demand more than the 34.4K they are entitled to, then either CO will pull out the country that is causing that and keep the rest current or impose a cod on the group. Now this has nothing to do with EB2-IC, this will just happen on their own account due to high demand (as some gurus are expecting).

If that happens, when the fall down from EB1 or eb4 or 5 happens towards the end of fy 2013, all countries in EB2 are treated as retrogressed (if cod on eb2-row is imposed, or if a country is pulled out). In that event, the extra numbers are distributed to the earliest priority dates, so it will to come eb2-I, since eb2-I will have the oldest set of priority dates.

So, this theory holds in my opinion if eb2-row has demand greater than 34.4K.

[suninphx]

One more approval EB2I (porting)-

http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/1024963421/eb2i-card-document-production-got-the-surp/page/last_page

[kd2008]

openaccount,

Let me clarify myself,

Starting FY 2013 Eb2-row will become current on its own account. Lets saying during the year, EB2-ROW(M&P included) have a demand more than the 34.4K they are entitled to, then either CO will pull out the country that is causing that and keep the rest current or impose a cod on the group. Now this has nothing to do with EB2-IC, this will just happen on their own account due to high demand (as some gurus are expecting).

If that happens, when the fall down from EB1 or eb4 or 5 happens towards the end of fy 2013, all countries in EB2 are treated as retrogressed (if cod on eb2-row is imposed, or if a country is pulled out). In that event, the extra numbers are distributed to the earliest priority dates, so it will to come eb2-I, since eb2-I will have the oldest set of priority dates.

So, this theory holds in my opinion if eb2-row has demand greater than 34.4K.

Murali you are incorrect. Spec and Teddy discussed this a while a back.

Quoting Teddy:
My understanding is that spillover happens to the most retrogressed countries in any category if and only if all countries in that category are current. So basically until EB2 ROW is current things will be quite bad because not only will EB2 ROW consume its own quota but will absorb any Eb1 and Eb5 spillover as well.
Here is the INA 202 Link - http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-1016.html (INA 202 Link)

What Teddy means by "if and only if all countries in that category are current" is that the category itself is current except for the retrogressed countries.

SO say, spillover were to happen to EB3, then it would first go to EB3ROW to make it current and when EB3 as a category is current it would go to EB3I which is retorgressed.

[murali83]

Murali you are incorrect. Spec and Teddy discussed this a while a back.

Quoting Teddy:

What Teddy means by "if and only if all countries in that category are current" is that the category itself is current except for the retrogressed countries.

SO say, spillover were to happen to EB3, then it would first go to EB3ROW to make it current and when EB3 as a category is current it would go to EB3I which is retorgressed.

KD,

I think this should be discussed further. If EB2-ROW demand is high in a year on its own account then the countries like south korea or others causing it should be pulled out first to see if EB2-ROW can be current after that. Only if EB2-ROW as a whole is exceeding 34.4 K with no country having exceeded its annual quota of 7% should the spill over be given to them. Otherwise it is a fraud that USCIS is committing by keeping countries that are exceeding the 7% limit inside EB2-ROW and still giving them spillover ahead of other retrogressed countries if such a situation arises.

[Kanmani]

This spillover topic is already discussed few months back .

http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?148-EB2-Predictions-(Rather-Calculations)-2012&p=26261#post26261
http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?148-EB2-Predictions-(Rather-Calculations)-2012&p=26275#post26275
http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?148-EB2-Predictions-(Rather-Calculations)-2012&p=26289#post26289

[kd2008]

KD,

I think this should be discussed further. If EB2-ROW demand is high in a year on its own account then the countries like south korea or others causing it should be pulled out first to see if EB2-ROW can be current after that. Only if EB2-ROW as a whole is exceeding 34.4 K with no country having exceeded its annual quota of 7% should the spill over be given to them. Otherwise it is a fraud that USCIS is committing by keeping countries that are exceeding the 7% limit inside EB2-ROW and still giving them spillover ahead of other retrogressed countries if such a situation arises.

Murali, this was discussed last year. From legal standpoint DOS is not committing fraud because of the way 7% limit is worded and applied. 7% limit is not a quota nor is it a category specific thing. It first takes a look at overall FB + EB total for the 7% and then delves into the category to see if it needs to be retrogressed. South Korea never reaches 7% limit when you look at their FB+EB totals.

Thanks, Kanmani! There you go, Murali. Please feel free to continue to discuss this. We want to make sure we are not missing anything.

[openaccount]

KD,

I think this should be discussed further. If EB2-ROW demand is high in a year on its own account then the countries like south korea or others causing it should be pulled out first to see if EB2-ROW can be current after that. Only if EB2-ROW as a whole is exceeding 34.4 K with no country having exceeded its annual quota of 7% should the spill over be given to them. Otherwise it is a fraud that USCIS is committing by keeping countries that are exceeding the 7% limit inside EB2-ROW and still giving them spillover ahead of other retrogressed countries if such a situation arises.

This is true only if countries like south korea exceeds 7%, other wise if none of ROW countries does not exceed 7% but they could exceed 34.4k together(similar to 2011 where EB2ROW consumed close to 35K) if this is the case then EB2ROW would get any SO first before it spills down to EB2IC

[IsItWorthTheTrouble]

I have been following this thread for the last week or so & found it to be very informative. So, took the initiative of putting in my 1st post.

I see lot of discussion on the dates in FY13 but can anyone surmise the following:

1. What dates EB2-I will open in FY13?

2. What dates will EB2-I end with in FY13?

3. Can EB2-ROW COD remain even in FY13?

Thanks.

[murali83]

Thanks KD and Kanmani,

Very useful info. So now we are back to hoping that they dont reach the 34.4K. Oh boy

[harapatta2012]

I have been following this thread for the last week or so & found it to be very informative. So, took the initiative of putting in my 1st post.

I see lot of discussion on the dates in FY13 but can anyone surmise the following:

1. What dates EB2-I will open in FY13?

2. What dates will EB2-I end with in FY13?

3. Can EB2-ROW COD remain even in FY13?


Thanks.



If divide between 3 scenarios for EB2I for 2013(start oct 2012):
Optimistic - Open@ July 2007 & Close @ Dec 2008
Pessimistic - Open@ July 2007 & Close @ Dec 2007
Realistic -Open@ July 2007 & Close @ Jun-Aug 2008 ( I wish Aug 2008)

Well, this can be said as based on
-my understanding from different gurus n this forum
- on historic SO, movement data
-and assuming 2011 was exception in many ways

Few thoughts:
-We should give some 'weight' to what CO said in earlier VB. That is " effort will be taken to move dates to May 2011....". Agreed that he can always counter argue this by saying 'this or that is higher or more than expected But still, he knows and has even have this in writing in VB. Atleast his optimism has some +ve surprise in store.

-SO all agree will be lower, disagreement is over how much, 40%, 50%, 75% lower? Difficult to say but surely between 30-60% lower.

-This year movement cannot be that illogical. I think we are missing something. Two things actually:
First, CO says demand was more than expected. I read on 'Leavy Blog' where he repeatedly mentioned that EB3-EB2 porting was lot more than expected. This could be significant.
Second, The porting cud be higher actually in EB2-WW as well. Dont forget EB3-WW is also messed up.
Combine these and they can be significant.

- Unfortunately, I see agreement now on SO to EB-IC likely will happen in April -june 2013, little in july-sep.

99% EB2-ROW should be cleared in oct 2012 itself.

[TorreyPines]

Anyways everything that's happening beats the logic. So with no proper facts to support, I am putting one scenario that comes to my mind. I want Gurus to tell if that could be a possibility.

Suppose if EB2ROW has a cut off date of say 01-01-2011 for the entire FY 2013 (This is purely based on the fact that USCIS can put any date for any category because of lack of transparency). Now, if there were any spillover from EB1, EB4 and Eb5 during FY 2013, would that all go to EB2IC as they are the most backlogged?

Some how I get a feeling that there is an internal agenda to make all EB2 WW move at one pace and remove discrepancies (A slight variant of HR3012 being internally implemented unofficially :))). I know it is just wishful thinking. But can any one throw some light on that possibility at least?

Well, fooling EB2-ROW won't be as easy and undramatic as fooling EB2I. CO is better off screwing us than finding new avenues. Back to my den.

[Spectator]

I've posted a discussion piece in my post on page 1 of this thread (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?148-EB2-Predictions-%28Rather-Calculations%29-2012) which outlines one possible approach to FY2013 and why it is might happen. It is limited in its scope.

If you want to discuss it, please try not to quote the whole piece, otherwise the replies will get very messy.

[kd2008]

I've posted a discussion piece in my post on page 1 of this thread (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?148-EB2-Predictions-%28Rather-Calculations%29-2012) which outlines one possible approach to FY2013 and why it is might happen. It is limited in its scope.

If you want to discuss it, please try not to quote the whole piece, otherwise the replies will get very messy.

Spec, excellent analysis as usual.

My counter point: Given the PERM filing trend this year and the PERM approval trend in last couple of months, and the EB2-ROW retrogression, the likely hood of any spillover is zero. Yup, zero! We may only have fall down. So only EB1/4/5 will give what they will and it is impossible to tell the figure a year in advance. A generous contribution would be 8K from these categories. So EB2IC may get 5.6K+8K=13.6K if it is a generous year. If the demand from EB2-ROW is heavy then the number may drop further but no lower than 5.6K.

[murali83]

I've posted a discussion piece in my post on page 1 of this thread (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?148-EB2-Predictions-%28Rather-Calculations%29-2012) which outlines one possible approach to FY2013 and why it is might happen. It is limited in its scope.

If you want to discuss it, please try not to quote the whole piece, otherwise the replies will get very messy.

Spec,

Thanks for your input, really appreciate it.

Your analysis uses inventory data, I assume 90% of it will convert into demand and 85% will get approved usually. So maximally 80% of inventory gets approved.

Would it be reasonable to expect that porting will balance the gap between inventory and demand. So even if demand is lower than inventory, porting will make in a way make effective demand equal to or more than inventory.

Is this the reason you used the full inventory for calculation and No porting?

[GhostWriter]

Spec, thanks for providing this. I was one of the many eagerly waiting for your views on 2013. One question, i know EB2-I and EB2-C have had the same cut-off date so far because of the common spillover. But if the yearly allocation for EB2-C can move their dates a lot further then do they still need to have the same cut-off date ?. EB3-C,I,M,P have different cut-off dates but then they don't get any spillovers. So does use of spillover makes it necessary to have a common cut-off date for EB2-I,C.


I've posted a discussion piece in my post on page 1 of this thread (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?148-EB2-Predictions-%28Rather-Calculations%29-2012) which outlines one possible approach to FY2013 and why it is might happen. It is limited in its scope.

If you want to discuss it, please try not to quote the whole piece, otherwise the replies will get very messy.

[Spectator]

Spec, excellent analysis as usual.

My counter point: Given the PERM filing trend this year and the PERM approval trend in last couple of months, and the EB2-ROW retrogression, the likely hood of any spillover is zero. Yup, zero! We may only have fall down. So only EB1/4/5 will give what they will and it is impossible to tell the figure a year in advance. A generous contribution would be 8K from these categories. So EB2IC may get 5.6K+8K=13.6K if it is a generous year. If the demand from EB2-ROW is heavy then the number may drop further but no lower than 5.6K.kd,

Appreciate the comments.

I think it just we use different terminology.

SPILLOVER = Fall Across & Fall Down to me.

I agree that Any Fall Across may be difficult to come by.

I had to choose a number for SOFAD. I realise the limitations of choosing a particular number, which is why I didn't even take Porting into account. Frankly, I didn't want to use too scary a number. :)

It was more the overall approach because of China's situation that I was trying to explain.

[Spectator]

Spec, thanks for providing this. I was one of the many eagerly waiting for your views on 2013. One question, i know EB2-I and EB2-C have had the same cut-off date so far because of the common spillover. But if the yearly allocation for EB2-C can move their dates a lot further then do they still need to have the same cut-off date ?. EB3-C,I,M,P have different cut-off dates but then they don't get any spillovers. So does use of spillover makes it necessary to have a common cut-off date for EB2-I,C.GhostWriter,

If both EB2-C and EB2-I are using Spillover, then they must have the same Cut Off Date.

If only EB2-I is using Spillover, then EB2-I Cut Off Date can not be greater than EB2-C. However, EB2-C can be greater than EB2-I.

This second situation happened in the May 2011 VB when EB2-C had a COD of 01AUG06 based on using the initial allocation, while EB2-I had a COD of 01JUL06 based on using spillover visas. CO explained this in the Notes:


Allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers in accordance with Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Section 202(a)(5)

INA Section 202(a)(5) provides that if total demand in a calendar quarter will be insufficient to use all available numbers in an Employment preference, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits.

Based on current levels of demand, there will be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment First and Second preferences. Such numbers may be allocated without regard to per-country limits, once a country has reached its preference annual limit.

Since under INA Section 203(e) such numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability, greater number use by one country would indicate greater demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.

Based on amount and priority dates of pending demand and year-to-date number use, a different cut-off date could be applied to each oversubscribed country, for the purpose of assuring that the maximum amount of available numbers will be used.

Note that a cut-off date imposed to control the use of “otherwise unused” numbers could be earlier than the cut-off date established to control number use under a quarterly or per-country annual limit.

For example, at present the India Employment Second preference cut-off date governs the use of numbers under Section 202(a)(5), India having reached its Employment Second annual limit; the China Employment Second preference cut-off date governs number use under the quarterly limit, since China has not yet reached its Employment Second annual limit.

The rate of number use under Section 202(a)(5) is continually monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for the oversubscribed countries. This helps assure that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while insuring that numbers also remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.

[openaccount]

I had to choose a number for SOFAD. I realise the limitations of choosing a particular number, which is why I didn't even take Porting into account. Frankly, I didn't want to use too scary a number. :)


Spec,

Isn't USCIS doing interfiling for EB3-EB2 porting as soon as I-140 EB2 is approved, if interfiling happens at time of I-140 approval then even if CO decides to make EB2IC dates U again some time next year(if CO wants to keep porting within limit) as he did this year porting numbers will be added right away as soon as I-140 approval happens. So porting numbers will be added to EB2I inventory right away when ever dates move forward.

[Spectator]

Spec,

Thanks for your input, really appreciate it.

Your analysis uses inventory data, I assume 90% of it will convert into demand and 85% will get approved usually. So maximally 80% of inventory gets approved.

Would it be reasonable to expect that porting will balance the gap between inventory and demand. So even if demand is lower than inventory, porting will make in a way make effective demand equal to or more than inventory.

Is this the reason you used the full inventory for calculation and No porting?murali,

Anything like that is a coincidence.

In fact, I tried to deliberately not use "real" figures, yet still keep them semi-sensible, because everyone will have a different view.

It is supposed to be a more top level overview. Possibly the idea can be refined, once we have better data. I am still in the mode of running "what if" scenarios to explore the possibilities for myself.

[GhostWriter]

Thanks for confirming Spec. You did not mention any regulatory change like HR3012 under tailwinds. Do you consider it quite unlikely even after the presidential elections are over.


GhostWriter,

If both EB2-C and EB2-I are using Spillover, then they must have the same Cut Off Date.

If only EB2-I is using Spillover, then EB2-I Cut Off Date can not be greater than EB2-C. However, EB2-C can be greater than EB2-I.

This second situation happened in the May 2011 VB when EB2-C had a COD of 01AUG06 based on using the initial allocation, while EB2-I had a COD of 01JUL06 based on using spillover visas. CO explained this in the Notes:

[vizcard]

Spec,
I think your analysis makes sense although as KD points out "Fall Across" seems tough.

I do have a question about the real implications of porting. First of all, would it be fair to say that most current porters are already covered in the inventory ? Also, given that we are current "U", any new porting candidates cannot file concurrent 140/485s which in turn implies they cannot be pre-adjudicated. Therefore, the 485 processing time applies to them. So assuming dates move to Nov 2007 in Q1, porters with PD in that period may not become "demand" until atleast Q2. So whatever the porting number we assume, only 9 months of that would be relevant.

Or am I completely nuts?

[Spectator]

Spec,

Isn't USCIS doing interfiling for EB3-EB2 porting as soon as I-140 EB2 is approved, if interfiling happens at time of I-140 approval then even if CO decides to make EB2IC dates U again some time next year(if CO wants to keep porting within limit) as he did this year porting numbers will be added right away as soon as I-140 approval happens. So porting numbers will be added to EB2I inventory right away when ever dates move forward.openaccount,

I am happy to admit that my knowledge of the interfiling and requesting the EB2 petition to be the basis for approval of an existing I-485 is very limited. I don't pretend to understand process fully.

For instance, can the EB2 petition be made the basis for the I-485 at a time when the EB2 PD is not Current? Do such cases have to wait until the PD is Current again?

I seem to remember reading a post by Ron Gotcher about this, but I can't remember what he said and for the life of me, I can't find it again. Grrrr.

Maybe Kanmani can come to the rescue - she has the knack of finding these things.

At the very least, there are still the numbers between May 5 and October 1 that we know nothing about. If they can be switched from EB3 to EB2 in the Inventory when not Current, we should see at least some of them in the next Inventory. If not, they will appear as dates become Current.

[Spectator]

Spec,
I think your analysis makes sense although as KD points out "Fall Across" seems tough.

I do have a question about the real implications of porting. First of all, would it be fair to say that most current porters are already covered in the inventory ? Also, given that we are current "U", any new porting candidates cannot file concurrent 140/485s which in turn implies they cannot be pre-adjudicated. Therefore, the 485 processing time applies to them. So assuming dates move to Nov 2007 in Q1, porters with PD in that period may not become "demand" until atleast Q2. So whatever the porting number we assume, only 9 months of that would be relevant.

Or am I completely nuts?vizcard,

That raises an interesting point.

True Porters to me are those EB3 applicants that already have filed an I-485, subsequently have an EB2 I-140 approved and request the I-485 to be adjudicated based on the EB2 I-140 and EB3 PD.

I'm not sure what to call those people who have an EB3 I-40 approved, then later have an EB2 I-140 approved, but who have never filed an I-485. Upgraders perhaps. to me they are different cases, because, as you say, the latter has a lag time to approval once the I-485 is submitted.

A true Porter cannot have a PD later than July 31, 2007 in my mind. I think each year will see a new crop of true Porters, since EB3-I is so badly retrogressed.

[Kanmani]

openaccount,

I am happy to admit that my knowledge of the interfiling and requesting the EB2 petition to be the basis for approval of an existing I-485 is very limited. I don't pretend to understand process fully.

For instance, can the EB2 petition be made the basis for the I-485 at a time when the EB2 PD is not Current? Do such cases have to wait until the PD is Current again?

I seem to remember reading a post by Ron Gotcher about this, but I can't remember what he said and for the life of me, I can't find it again. Grrrr.

Maybe Kanmani can come to the rescue - she has the knack of finding these things.

At the very least, there are still the numbers between May 5 and October 1 that we know nothing about. If they can be switched from EB3 to EB2 in the Inventory when not Current, we should see at least some of them in the next Inventory. If not, they will appear as dates become Current.

Spec,

My understanding of the term interfiling was elaborated by the attorney I met with at the famous M' law firm few months back.

It is exactly as stated by you for true porters "request the I-485 to be adjudicated based on the EB2 I-140 "

As interfiling is not limited to Eb3 to Eb2 porting, your statement can be modified as 'request the I-485 to be adjudicated based on a specific I-140 approval'

Eventhough it doesn't involve a new AOS petition,technically it cannot be done when the PD is not current.

[nishant2200]

Hello friends, been away for a while. Needed a break. Missing you all.

Very intriguing July bulletin. EB2-ROW having a 2k9 cutoff date feels unbelievable.

Spec is really guiding us a lot in this seemingly chaotic times.

FY 2012 has really turned out to be a twister. I just said this today to a coworker: Let's not fight the pieces falling into place.

If USCIS had followed proper order, I still think q1 2k8 would be where we at, although U might have masked it for last few months, but this is what we might have begun with in FY 2013. Now I think we shall begin at around August 2007, with a slow progress. Don't think CO will go gung-ho in QSP again anytime soon.

[Kanmani]

vizcard,

That raises an interesting point.

True Porters to me are those EB3 applicants that already have filed an I-485, subsequently have an EB2 I-140 approved and request the I-485 to be adjudicated based on the EB2 I-140 and EB3 PD.

I'm not sure what to call those people who have an EB3 I-40 approved, then later have an EB2 I-140 approved, but who have never filed an I-485. Upgraders perhaps. to me they are different cases, because, as you say, the latter has a lag time to approval once the I-485 is submitted.

A true Porter cannot have a PD later than July 31, 2007 in my mind. I think each year will see a new crop of true Porters, since EB3-I is so badly retrogressed.

In my opinion, upgraders are also porters . So we have to comeup with a new term for porters who have interfiled their petition . Is it sensible?

[vedu]

KD,

Your statement on last year's PERM receipt numbers may not be correct. Last year DOS received 45,084 applications (http://www.immilaw.com/FAQ/PERM%20stats%206%20-%2011.pdf) by May 31, 2011 as compared to 43,100 applications they received this year by May 31st. So, we are actually slightly better off this year as compared to last year.


http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/perm_select_statis_oct2011_may_2012.pdf

Applications Received
YTD (Oct. 1, 2011 – May 30, 2012) 43,100
Oct. 1 –Dec. 31, 2011 (Q1) 13,300
Jan. 1 –Mar. 31, 2012 (Q2) 17,700
Apr. 1 –May 30, 2012(Q3 to date) 12,100

These are massive amounts of filings. Last three years, avg. number of filings per year were about 43,000. We have met those in just 8 months. Oh, Lordy!

Applications Certified
YTD(Oct. 1, 2011 –May 30, 2012)* 27,600
Oct. 1 –Dec. 31, 2011 (Q1) 9,500
Jan. 1 –Mar. 31, 2012 (Q2) 7,100
Apr. 1 –May 30, 2012(Q3 to date) 11,000

[Spectator]

Spec,

My understanding of the term interfiling was elaborated by the attorney I met with at the famous M' law firm few months back.

It is exactly as stated by you for true porters "request the I-485 to be adjudicated based on the EB2 I-140 "

As interfiling is not limited to Eb3 to Eb2 porting, your statement can be modified as 'request the I-485 to be adjudicated based on a specific I-140 approval'

Even though it doesn't involve a new AOS petition,technically it cannot be done when the PD is not current.Kanmani,

Thanks for your explanation.


In my opinion, upgraders are also porters . So we have to come up with a new term for porters who have interfiled their petition . Is it sensible?

Agreed. I like to think of them separately, rather than as one group.

[murali83]

KD,

Your statement on last year's PERM receipt numbers may not be correct. Last year DOS received 45,084 applications (http://www.immilaw.com/FAQ/PERM%20stats%206%20-%2011.pdf) by May 31, 2011 as compared to 43,100 applications they received this year by May 31st. So, we are actually slightly better off this year as compared to last year.

Vedu,

Great find man. I did check other sources and the numbers on your pdf match.

But there is just one point lying underneath, if it has any significance at this stage. In fy 2011, people with advanced degree were 37%, while this time it is 51%.

Also the 2011 file does not apparently provide the numbers certified and denied. But has a 22000 active cases, is that the number certified, just curious.

If that is the case we have more certified cases this year 27,600.

But I am pretty sure that active cases is not equal to certified case (If that was the case the denial rate is as high as 51%), would seem very steep. So my next question is can we find how many cases were certified between oct 2010 and may 2011. (This link does not seem to work, http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/quarter_2_2012/PERM_Case_Data_FY2011.mdb )

[murali83]

I have another point. Can some one tell me how reliable are trackitt % when it comes to PERM stats?. I ran filter for last 6 months and it tells me that % of ROWMP filers is around 15% which is much less than what Veni suggested in one of his recent post (40%)

Suninphx,

I am not sure how reliable trackitt is in this regard due to excessive participation of EB2-I on trackitt. If you look at the perm cert file for 2012, It does give break down by country and EB2IC is bang on at 61%, so ROW+MP is 39%.

[suninphx]

Suninphx,

I am not sure how reliable trackitt is in this regard due to excessive participation of EB2-I on trackitt. If you look at the perm cert file for 2012, It does give break down by country and EB2IC is bang on at 61%, so ROW+MP is 39%.

Murali - you are right. In fact, I realized that later, so removed that post.

[tatikonda]

Hi All,

I am wondering if on going AILA conference will give us any further information to help predict numbers in better way ..

Spec/Q/Veni and other Gurus, share your thoughts ..

Thank you

[vizcard]

In my opinion, upgraders are also porters . So we have to comeup with a new term for porters who have interfiled their petition . Is it sensible?

So "upgraders" eventually become "porters" or do they become "one of us"? I don't mean that in a disparaging way but I want to define it so that we don't double count in the math.

[Spectator]

So "upgraders" eventually become "porters" or do they become "one of us"? I don't mean that in a disparaging way but I want to define it so that we don't double count in the math.vizcard,

Fair point.

Maybe we just need to understand that we are talking about "Ëffective Porting Numbers".

By that, I mean those Porters who can actually be approved in the FY because their PD becomes Current.

10,000 could port with an existing PD in 2009 and it would likely have no effect in FY2013.

I would guess that most Porters in FY2013 would actually still come from the 2004-2007 range, where most probably have an existing I-485 on file already. Those with a PD of Aug 2007 to wherever the COD reaches in FY2013 would be the minority, although some may have been able to file an I-485 earlier this year.

For FY2013 there might be 3 "groups" of Porters:

a) Those who interfiled in FY2012 before the dates retrogressed beyond their PD and have not been approved yet - most of these should already be shown in the May Inventory.
b) Those from FY2012 who didn't finish the interfiling process before dates retrogressed beyond their PD - at least 4 months worth from June-September 2012.
c) Those who didn't start in FY2012, but will complete the process in FY2013 as dates become Current.

[murali83]

Gurus out there,

I am not sure if anyone got a chance to look into Vedu's post. But the more I think in that direction, I feel EB2 row will not behave any different in FY 2013 compared to FY 2012. Their demand is pretty much the same (in fact it maybe less if anything based on the perm data available). I am still waiting to see if we can get access to the certifications by country in 2011 to get a better idea and compare it to what we have this year.

So between Oct 2011 and May 2012 based on published data we have certified perms of 27600 of which 10764 are from ROWMP countries. Now how many of these contribute of EB2-ROWMP is a little difficult to guess in my opinion based on the information available.

My guess based on the data for Oct 2010 - May 2011 (http://www.immilaw.com/FAQ/PERM%20stats%206%20-%2011.pdf) is that certified perms in that time frame are lesser for ROWMP as well.

Doesn't this counter our thought that spillover from EB2ROW in fiscal year 2013 will be almost nil. I mean if anything they should yield in 2013 what they would have yielded this year 2012 (they would have yielded a little lesser, if not for the fiasco).

[Kanmani]

Viz,
As Spec said, Porters with 2008 & later PD may be seen only in the coming years. We might have had some upgraders who filed their I-485 during Nov'11 to March'12 , I don't think those numbers can make a substantial effect on the OR.

[kd2008]

Gurus out there,

I am not sure if anyone got a chance to look into Vedu's post. But the more I think in that direction, I feel EB2 row will not behave any different in FY 2013 compared to FY 2012. Their demand is pretty much the same (in fact it maybe less if anything based on the perm data available). I am still waiting to see if we can get access to the certifications by country in 2011 to get a better idea and compare it to what we have this year.

So between Oct 2011 and May 2012 based on published data we have certified perms of 27600 of which 10764 are from ROWMP countries. Now how many of these contribute of EB2-ROWMP is a little difficult to guess in my opinion based on the information available.

My guess based on the data for Oct 2010 - May 2011 (http://www.immilaw.com/FAQ/PERM%20stats%206%20-%2011.pdf) is that certified perms in that time frame are lesser for ROWMP as well.

Doesn't this counter our thought that spillover from EB2ROW in fiscal year 2013 will be almost nil. I mean if anything they should yield in 2013 what they would have yielded this year 2012 (they would have yielded a little lesser, if not for the fiasco).

Murali, please read the PERM statistics that Veni and I discussed few pages back. PERM situation is dynamic. In Oct 11 to March 12 period there were 16,600 certifications. Then in April 12 and May 12 there were 11,000 certifications.

Moreover, PERM filings (and not approvals) have averaged about 43,000 per year in FY 2009,2010 and 2011. But in FY 2012 in first 8 months itself, there have been 43,000 filings.

So you can see filings are increasing and approvals are picking up. This implies the demand will increase for EB2-ROW next year, especially so because EB2-ROW is retrogressed now and will become current in FY 2013.

This is why EB2-ROW will mostly likely consume just as much as this year, and very likely more than this year.

[murali83]

Murali, please read the PERM statistics that Veni and I discussed few pages back. PERM situation is dynamic. In Oct 11 to March 12 period there were 16,600 certifications. Then in April 12 and May 12 there were 11,000 certifications.

Moreover, PERM filings (and not approvals) have averaged about 43,000 per year in FY 2009,2010 and 2011. But in FY 2012 in first 8 months itself, there have been 43,000 filings.

So you can see filings are increasing and approvals are picking up. This implies the demand will increase for EB2-ROW next year, especially so because EB2-ROW is retrogressed now and will become current in FY 2013.

This is why EB2-ROW will mostly likely consume just as much as this year, and very likely more than this year.

KD,

In the pdf file for 2011 approx 45K filings in FY 2011 is for a time period from Oct 2010 to May 2011, not the entire year (it says total applications received between Oct 2010 and May 2011). So in these 8 months we have only 43K filings in 2012 compared to 2011 which received 45K in 8 months.

Please correct me if I am wrong

I agree that perm filing is dynamic and approvals might increase. Filings in the last 4 months of the year may get higher or lower than last year. But looking at just the first 8 months FY 2012 seems to have roughly 2K filings lesser than FY 2011.

PS: I agree that filings in 2011 were considerably higher than 2010 and maybe 2009 also.

[Spectator]

KD,

In the pdf file for 2011 approx 45K filings in FY 2011 is for a time period from Oct 2010 to May 2011, not the entire year (it says total applications received between Oct 2010 and May 2011). So in these 8 months we have only 43K filings in 2012 compared to 2011 which received 45K in 8 months.

Please correct me if I am wrong

I agree that perm filing is dynamic and approvals might increase. Filings in the last 4 months of the year may get higher or lower than last year. But looking at just the first 8 months FY 2012 seems to have roughly 2K filings lesser than FY 2011.

PS: I agree that filings in 2011 were considerably higher than 2010 and maybe 2009 also.

Without having apples to apples comparison from the DOL Factsheets for Q1 and Q2 it is difficult to compare properly.

I agree that as of the end of May, FY2011 and FY2012 are very comparable.

What I will repeat (rather like a parrot - sorry) is that at some point, we should see a dip in PERM receipts caused by the inability to get a PWD at the end of 2011, followed by a surge when they all finally come through.

It is possible that we have now come out of the dip and are into the surge phase.

I think only time will resolve this debate.

[Kanmani]

One more thing which makes difficult to compare 2012 with 2011 is the warning from DOL for a potential debarment of the employer one who repeatedly withdraws perm applications under audit . 2012 onwards, withdrawing audit perm applications and refiling as fresh applications are not allowed.

[Kanmani]

Spec,

Here is the wordings from Adjudicator’s Field Manual Chapter 23.2(I)(2)(L)

23.2 General Adjustment of Status Issues. (l) Transferring an Adjustment of Status Application from One Underlying Eligibility Basis to Another . (2) Guidelines (When considering a request by an adjustment applicant to convert the basis of his or her application, an adjudicator should take the following into account

(L) The Priority Date must Be Current for the Basis to Which the Applicant Wishes to Convert .

In order to convert an adjustment application to a new basis involving a preference classification, the alien must be the beneficiary of an approved visa petition (pertaining to that new basis) which has a current visa availability date. With limited exceptions, a priority date is NOT transferrable from one preference category to another, or from one petition to another.

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/AFM/HTML/AFM/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-8624/0-0-0-8666.html#0-0-0-427

[Spectator]

Spec,

Here is the wordings from Adjudicator’s Field Manual Chapter 23.2(I)(2)(L)

23.2 General Adjustment of Status Issues. (l) Transferring an Adjustment of Status Application from One Underlying Eligibility Basis to Another . (2) Guidelines (When considering a request by an adjustment applicant to convert the basis of his or her application, an adjudicator should take the following into account

(L) The Priority Date must Be Current for the Basis to Which the Applicant Wishes to Convert .

In order to convert an adjustment application to a new basis involving a preference classification, the alien must be the beneficiary of an approved visa petition (pertaining to that new basis) which has a current visa availability date. With limited exceptions, a priority date is NOT transferrable from one preference category to another, or from one petition to another.

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/AFM/HTML/AFM/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-8624/0-0-0-8666.html#0-0-0-427Kanmani,

Absolutely brilliant!!

I consider myself quite good at digging these things up, but you are in a different league.

Thank You

[openaccount]

Given the EB2-WW backlog that will be created, it seems unlikely that any QSP would be available to EB2-I in Q1.

That would leave the maximum that could be allocated to EB2-I in Q1 as the initial 2,803 visas. That would move the Cut Off Date to only 15 Aug 07.


Spec, if all 2800 numbers are allocated to EB2I in Q1 of 2013 and if CO does not see any spill over in Q2 & expecting any SO to happen in Q3/Q4, will dates go back to 'U' one more time and stay U till SO happens.

I was looking at previous VBs to see if anything like this happened before-after 2007 fiasco and it did happen once in 2009 when dates went back from 15-Feb-2004/VB-May2009 to 1-Jan-2000/VB-Jun2009.

[vizcard]

Spec, if all 2800 numbers are allocated to EB2I in Q1 of 2013 and if CO does not see any spill over in Q2 & expecting any SO to happen in Q3/Q4, will dates go back to 'U' one more time and stay U till SO happens.

I was looking at previous VBs to see if anything like this happened before-after 2007 fiasco and it did happen once in 2009 when dates went back from 15-Feb-2004/VB-May2009 to 1-Jan-2000/VB-Jun2009.

Selfishly I prefer a U in between COD moves. That keeps the numbers clean and predictable.

[Spectator]

I have moved the recent Discussion to a DREAMERS-Deferred-Action-Process-for-Young-People-Who-Are-Low-Enforcement-Priority (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?995-DREAMERS-Deferred-Action-Process-for-Young-People-Who-Are-Low-Enforcement-Priority) thread in Live Discussion.

[immi2910]

Does anyone have an offline copy of I-485 Employment-Based Inventory Statistics (updated May 3, 2012). The website has incomplete file.

[Spectator]

Does anyone have an offline copy of I-485 Employment-Based Inventory Statistics (updated May 3, 2012). The website has incomplete file.This is the link to the pdf for the latest version of the USCIS Inventory.

LINK (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/I-485%20Employment-Based%20Inventory%20Statistics/Employment-based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory%20as%20of%2005-03-12.pdf)

It looks complete to me.

The csv format data imported fine for me as well.

[soggadu]

it's been a while so trying my hand and mind at predictions again... this is what i think will we be looking going forward...

Eb2 row accumulation before oct 2012 ~ 6500 for last quarter ( its a full quarter backlog and i am assuming 6500 consumption for EB2 ROW per quarter, we usually get around 12-15K from EB2 for EB2 I/C so around 25K used by ROW in 4 quarters)

Come 2013, EB2 row will use 6500 + 25000 + 8k (already pending from inventory report for 2011 and 2012) = 39500 out of 40K allocated i.e. 5000 short ( as I./C will be allocated 5600 out of 40K)

so EB2 row will continue to have a COD ??

porting = atleast 2k more until 2007 end??

No spillover from EB2 row come july 2013 and EB2 I crossing 2007 is only at the mercy of EB1 and other category spillover that too after EB2 row gets the first 5000...unfortunate numbers... i pray i am wrong...

What do you guys think?? please prove me wrong...

[vizcard]

it's been a while so trying my hand and mind at predictions again... this is what i think will we be looking going forward...

Eb2 row accumulation before oct 2012 ~ 6500 for last quarter ( its a full quarter backlog and i am assuming 6500 consumption for EB2 ROW per quarter, we usually get around 12-15K from EB2 for EB2 I/C so around 25K used by ROW in 4 quarters)

Come 2013, EB2 row will use 6500 + 25000 + 8k (already pending from inventory report for 2011 and 2012) = 39500 out of 40K allocated i.e. 5000 short ( as I./C will be allocated 5600 out of 40K)

so EB2 row will continue to have a COD ??

porting = atleast 2k more until 2007 end??

No spillover from EB2 row come july 2013 and EB2 I crossing 2007 is only at the mercy of EB1 and other category spillover that too after EB2 row gets the first 5000...unfortunate numbers... i pray i am wrong...

What do you guys think?? please prove me wrong...

I don't think it's wrong. Getting any SO from ROW will be great but at the very least I hope they don't have CODs. Personally I think they become C before year end.

[Spectator]

it's been a while so trying my hand and mind at predictions again... this is what i think will we be looking going forward...

Eb2 row accumulation before oct 2012 ~ 6500 for last quarter ( its a full quarter backlog and i am assuming 6500 consumption for EB2 ROW per quarter, we usually get around 12-15K from EB2 for EB2 I/C so around 25K used by ROW in 4 quarters)

Come 2013, EB2 row will use 6500 + 25000 + 8k (already pending from inventory report for 2011 and 2012) = 39500 out of 40K allocated i.e. 5000 short ( as I./C will be allocated 5600 out of 40K)

so EB2 row will continue to have a COD ??

porting = atleast 2k more until 2007 end??

No spillover from EB2 row come july 2013 and EB2 I crossing 2007 is only at the mercy of EB1 and other category spillover that too after EB2 row gets the first 5000...unfortunate numbers... i pray i am wrong...

What do you guys think?? please prove me wrong...soggadu,

Your EB2-ROW calculation would be correct if the ongoing Inventory dropped to zero, but that is not what will happen.

The Inventory will always show a fairly similar figure, since processing is not instantaneous.

Therefore your calculation would become 6,500 + 25,000 + reduction in Inventory

The Inventory change could be positive or negative, but it won't be a big figure and EB2 -ROW should be within their allocation of 34.4k for the year based on your figures.

For your information EB2-WW (EB2-ROW/M/P) used 32.9k visas in FY2009, 27.4k in FY2010 and probably around 33.3k in FY2011 (educated guess).

Spill Across given by EB2-WW was 1.5k in FY2009, 9.7k in FY2010 and around 1.1k in FY2011.

So I would agree that, in the worst case, EB2-WW will not give any spillover in FY2013 and may actually use some of that available from EB1/EB4/EB5.

[pch053]

This is a slightly unrelated issue more related to EB3C (and EB2C to some extent). I see the overall pending I485 apps for EB3C to be 2,423 and out of which only 683 applications are in 2005 and ~1K in 2006. So, won't it be natural to move EB3-C at the same pace with EB3-ROW; given the max per-country quota every year is 2866, they can easily approve far less EB3-C applications than the max # and bring it to the same level as EB3-ROW. The current PD for EB3-C is Sep'05 whereas EB3-ROW has progressed to July'06. I don't follow why EB3-C has a separate PD that is lagging behind EB3-ROW, given so few applications they have pending.

Now, coming to EB2-C movement, going by the pending numbers the EB2-C PDs should be somewhere in the range of July - Sep'08 at the end of Sep'13. I think any spillover that will be available (from EB1, EB4, EB5 combined) will most likely go to EB2-I (assuming EB2-ROW is current; if not it goes to EB2-ROW first) as EB2-C will be moving ahead at a faster rate. I think in the coming years EB2-ROW will become current soon and EB2-C will have different PDs as compared with EB2-I (~6 months - 1 year ahead of EB2-I), though the major share of spillover visas (whatever, if at all available) will go to EB2-I.

Have been out of this loop for a while and not very up to date with the current scenario; not sure whether my thoughts/predictions make sense!

[Spectator]

pch,

I think generally what you say is correct.

A couple of comments.

EB3-C has very high CP numbers. It has been about 30%, but jumped to over 55% in FY2010. It may take a bit longer than you think for EB2-C to reach the same COD as as EB2-WW. 12 months ago, EB3-C was 16 months behind EB3-WW. In July, they will be 10 months behind, but 3 months of the 6 months came in June 2012 alone.

The difference between EB2-C and EB2-I depends entirely on the level of SOFAD - the lower the SOFAD, the bigger the difference in Cut Off Dates, because essentially EB2-I uses all spare visas, as you said.

[Eb2_Dec07]

Guys ,

I hear from my friends about some people they know with PD EB2 I after Aug 2007 getting approvals after answering RFEs.

IS there any trend to these approvals . Any rationale for these approvals or is it just some kind of a mistaken approval .

Thank You

[soggadu]

Guys ,

I hear from my friends about some people they know with PD EB2 I after Aug 2007 getting approvals after answering RFEs.

IS there any trend to these approvals . Any rationale for these approvals or is it just some kind of a mistaken approval .

Thank You

These might be the cases where a visa number is already allocated before VB became U

[just_curious]

http://www.nfap.com/pdf/NFAPPolicyBrief.StillWaiting.June2012.pdf


Looks like the waiting time is going to be more than it is expected..

[vizcard]

http://www.nfap.com/pdf/NFAPPolicyBrief.StillWaiting.June2012.pdf


Looks like the waiting time is going to be more than it is expected..

Its just another paper with no new facts or additional "research".

[bvsamrat]

Very informative for the new people to know the status. 70 years wait time. That is too much. I donot know why they do not implement STEM. Giving all the scolorships and yet no preference to US degrees?


http://www.nfap.com/pdf/NFAPPolicyBrief.StillWaiting.June2012.pdf


Looks like the waiting time is going to be more than it is expected..

[abcx13]

Its just another paper with no new facts or additional "research".
Actually, yes there is new info. It counters the claim that the percentage of IC PhDs staying in the US is the same as it was before.

[just_curious]

Its just another paper with no new facts or additional "research".

I don't think this statement needs to be necessarily true because I knew the statistics and facts that any policy analyst will go through to lay out the facts. The numbers behind it may not be reportable.

[gcq]

It seems EB2 ROW is going to be unavailable in upcoming bulletins and EB1 is going to have a cut off date. - source **

[pch053]

EB2-ROW with a PD of Jan'09 is almost equivalent to U; there are hardly (< 1K) any pending I485 applications for EB2-ROW with PD up to 31st Dec'08. EB1 having a cut-off date will probably imply that almost nearly all of the yearly quota (total of EB1 + EB2 and most of EB4 + EB5) has been exhausted.

[murali83]

I see approvals for eb1 on trackitt until the end of last week. I think it will quite unlikely for eb1 to become unavailable soon.

[Eb2_Dec07]

Gurus ,

Any updates to where we will stand at the opening of 2013 and what is expected for EB2 India in the first 2 quarters of 2013 .

[Spectator]

The CIS Ombudsman Annual Report 2011 (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/cisomb-annual-report-2011.pdf) is now available.

Other than a bit abaout EB5 and EAD delays, it looks generally uninteresting for EB applicants.

[venkat]

My friend who works in Cognizant (CTS) got his GC through EB1 category last week.

140 - Filed in March and approved in April
485 - Filed in April and approved in June.


I see approvals for eb1 on trackitt until the end of last week. I think it will quite unlikely for eb1 to become unavailable soon.

[abcx13]

I'm interested in getting my hands on the number of I140 filings sorted by petitioning company. Does anybody know if it's already out there like it is for H1Bs? The PERM data is misleading because one PERM can lead to multiple I140 petitions. I'm curious as to what percentage of petitions are filed by Indian IT companies. I'm willing to file a FOIA request if that's what it takes but just wanted to see if it's already out there.

[murali83]

Experts,

A weird situation, maybe someone can help me out.

1. I work for Company A in a Role A. I have been with them for 6 years and they have done my perm and 485, etc.. I have my EAD now it will be 6 months since I filed my 485 by the end of this month.

2. Now I have an offer from firm B in a Role B. Neither are the companies working in the same sector, nor are the roles related. So I assume using AC 21 here is out of the equation.

What are my options if Company B will not sponsor a H1B. I have 2 possible solutions, can you guys tell me if they are legally possible.

1. I convince Company A not to revoke my I-140 and go and start working for company B with my EAD. (I know this is extremely risky, but are there any LEGAL ways around it)

2. With my EAD I can hold multiple jobs. Company A is a very nice and are very humane with the immigration aspect. So if I convince Company A that I will perform 2 jobs at the same time. Can I take a sabbatical from them for a year (get paid from my 401k/profit sharing, or even if I don't get paid from them, does it matter?) and go and work for Company B. If at any stage immigration issues an rfe or asks any question, can I submit a letter from Company A that I am still employed (technically sabbatical still means employed right?) with them and that they intend to employ me after I receive my GC (I will definitely go back and work for them for at least 6 months after my GC for this big favor).

Is option 2 entirely legal and tenable.

Any help will be greatly appreciated.

[Kanmani]

Murali

If you convince company A for supporting you on any immigration issues, you can join B on EAD. But I doubt option 2 would work because you cannot prove the employment as described in the perm with A while working for B as a full time employee.

[murali83]

Murali

If you convince company A for supporting you on any immigration issues, you can join B on EAD. But I doubt option 2 would work because you cannot prove the employment as described in the perm with A while working for B as a full time employee.

Kanmani,

Thanks for your response

2 follow up questions. When you say, I can join B on EAD if company A agrees to support me on immigration issues. Lets say I get an RFE at some point and they ask for a EVL. What do I do?

Can you explain further when you say "I cannot prove employment as described in the Perm". Is taking a sabbatical from company A violating the conditions of the Perm, or Is working full time for Company B violate the perm (even though I am still an employee with A on sabbatical).

Thanks a ton

[Kanmani]

------------------------------------------


Kanmani,

Thanks for your response

2 follow up questions. When you say, I can join B on EAD if company A agrees to support me on immigration issues. Lets say I get an RFE at some point and they ask for a EVL. What do I do?
EVL submitted for AOS purpose describes the job is still available for future employment. So you can submit one from Company A even if you are not employed with them.

What do you mean by "I cannot prove employment as described in the Perm". Is taking a sabbatical from company A violating the conditions of the Perm, or Is working full time for Company B violate the perm (even though I am still an employee with A on sabbatical).

I responded to this line of your op "can I submit a letter from Company A that I am still employed (technically sabbatical still means employed right?) "
Suppose you get an rfe for EVL , I understand from the above that you wish to tell them that you have already taken the job(which is not required ) and still employed for the sponsoring employer. In that case you are not complying with the perm description (40 hrs per week)

I have already discussed about leave on absence and in my opinion except for few medical reasons, the employment is not counted.

[murali83]

^^ Kanmani

Thanks a ton. I guess i can always get a letter from them for future employment from my current employer.

Thanks for explaining the concept of aos and future employment. So i guess that seals my legal worries.

You made my day

[Stemcell]

"I have already discussed about leave on absence and in my opinion except for few medical reasons, the employment is not counted."


Kanmani can you please throw some more light on that, or provide me the link for that.
Thank you.

[soggadu]

guys... please let me know of your experiences and process for the below topic...thnx...

http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?1004-PIO-for-my-infant&p=28023#post28023

[Kanmani]

"I have already discussed about leave on absence and in my opinion except for few medical reasons, the employment is not counted."


Kanmani can you please throw some more light on that, or provide me the link for that.
Thank you.

Stemcell,

I couldn't find the earlier discussions. I was mentioning my Indian experience on leave of absence (in specific unpaid leave). During unpaid leave, employees are removed from the payroll and other benefits , are not shown in the organisational strength, there will be a break in the service records etc etc.

I have no US experience, here the legal leave rules mention a 12 week unpaid leave period for medical reasons which may be counted against service, that includes employee must continue to contribute insurance premiums and other payments if necessary .

I am not sure about long unpaid leaves as Murali mentioned so I gave my opinion mixed with my own experience and I personally think those leaves' may be considered as break.

[immi2910]

This is the link to the pdf for the latest version of the USCIS Inventory.

LINK (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/I-485%20Employment-Based%20Inventory%20Statistics/Employment-based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory%20as%20of%2005-03-12.pdf)

It looks complete to me.

The csv format data imported fine for me as well.

Thanks Spec. I was trying to get to the link on USCIS website (I am using http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=16551543455e5210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=16551543455e5210VgnVCM100000082ca60a RCRD). The file was incomplete when I last checked and today the link is not working.

[Spectator]

Thanks Spec. I was trying to get to the link on USCIS website (I am using http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=16551543455e5210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=16551543455e5210VgnVCM100000082ca60a RCRD). The file was incomplete when I last checked and today the link is not working.immi2910,

I see what you mean.

They seem to be mucking about with it. The CSV file only contains the first page for all applications now.

Edit: Proper links to both the pdf (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/I-485%20Employment-Based%20Inventory%20Statistics/Employment-based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory%20as%20of%2005-03-12.pdf) and csv (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/I-485%20Employment-Based%20Inventory%20Statistics/PendingEmploymentBasedI-485Inventory_050312.csv) files were restored on June 22, 2012.

[vizcard]

Article on immigrant impact on housing market by the Economist.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/06/focus-2?fsrc=scn/fb/wl/bl/homeawayfromhome

[qesehmk]

vizcard, there was a case made by somebody in harvard to provide GCs if a person buys a home. Imagine that would clear all backlog of EB! So 200K houses sold at average 200K price = $40B of impact.

In fact its the economic purchasing power of immigrants that is the main reason why immigration is officially allowed. In principle 3% GDP growth is targeted of which 2% is supposed to come from productivity & 1% from population growth. In advanced countries the local population can't grow at 1% growth and hence immigration is necessary.

Of course that is old school economic theory behind immigration. The digital revolution completely threw the productivity numbers and blew through the roof.
Article on immigrant impact on housing market by the Economist.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/06/focus-2?fsrc=scn/fb/wl/bl/homeawayfromhome

[Stemcell]

Stemcell,

I couldn't find the earlier discussions. I was mentioning my Indian experience on leave of absence (in specific unpaid leave). During unpaid leave, employees are removed from the payroll and other benefits , are not shown in the organisational strength, there will be a break in the service records etc etc.

I have no US experience, here the legal leave rules mention a 12 week unpaid leave period for medical reasons which may be counted against service, that includes employee must continue to contribute insurance premiums and other payments if necessary .

I am not sure about long unpaid leaves as Murali mentioned so I gave my opinion mixed with my own experience and I personally think those leaves' may be considered as break.



Thank you Kanmani.
In the US one can use FMLA (family medical leave act) for full time employees. I guess one can take upto 6 months leave on it.Not sure about the insurance premiums contributions though.

[vizcard]

Thank you Kanmani.
In the US one can use FMLA (family medical leave act) for full time employees. I guess one can take upto 6 months leave on it.Not sure about the insurance premiums contributions though.

What you say is true but i think the length of time differs by state . In any case, the situation described by Murali would not fall in FMLA.

[Kanmani]

Thank you Kanmani.
In the US one can use FMLA (family medical leave act) for full time employees. I guess one can take upto 6 months leave on it.Not sure about the insurance premiums contributions though.

Stemcell,

Even in the case of FMLA, employees are entitled to a maximum of 12 weeks of job protected unpaid leave in a year/12 month period.

http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/posters/fmlaen.pdf

[mesan123]

Does anyone know if a there is a job location change(same position) for a person in h1b. is it enough to file LCA? or should he also file amendement....

[Kanmani]

USCIS Performance data as of March 2012 is available now ......http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Resources/Reports%20and%20Studies/Immigration%20Forms%20Data/All%20Form%20Types/all_form_types_performance_data_qtr.pdf

[TeddyKoochu]

soggadu,

Your EB2-ROW calculation would be correct if the ongoing Inventory dropped to zero, but that is not what will happen.

The Inventory will always show a fairly similar figure, since processing is not instantaneous.

Therefore your calculation would become 6,500 + 25,000 + reduction in Inventory

The Inventory change could be positive or negative, but it won't be a big figure and EB2 -ROW should be within their allocation of 34.4k for the year based on your figures.

For your information EB2-WW (EB2-ROW/M/P) used 32.9k visas in FY2009, 27.4k in FY2010 and probably around 33.3k in FY2011 (educated guess).

Spill Across given by EB2-WW was 1.5k in FY2009, 9.7k in FY2010 and around 1.1k in FY2011.

So I would agree that, in the worst case, EB2-WW will not give any spillover in FY2013 and may actually use some of that available from EB1/EB4/EB5.

Spec great details from you as always. Let us try to come up with ROW consumption from another angle.
- EB2 I/C probably used 22 - 24K this year. This gives ROW + M + P a wiggle room of 16 - 18K.
- When the brakes were applied that was the time they realized that EB1 will actually use up its entire cap this year, essentially EB1 would not lose anything. EB1 using its full cap was not a surprise considering that last year the Kazarian memo slowed down things, there was a huge reduction of I140 backlog and EB1C usage was quite high. Based on these factors I had made a prediction that Eb1 will probably not give any SOFAD this year.
- From Trackitt 2011 v/s 2012 approvals for EB2 ROW Primary approvals are 507 to 330.
- Now for simplicity let’s assume that EB2 ROW, M & P were all equally impacted with EB2 I/C crossing the line assuming the demands were same this year as well we saw 330/507 = .65 of the approvals from last year. For simplicity I have assumed the ROW numbers from Trackitt to represent ROW + M + P.
- Now .65 of 28 gives the range of 18. The figure of 18K gels well with the guesstimated value of 22K of what Eb2 I/C have consumed assuming the 40K allowed for EB2.
- So if we go by 18K then .35 of this i.e. ~ 6-6.5K was not satiated this year. This kind of wipes out ROW sofad for the upcoming year or at least 75% of it.
Let’s wait and see how things turn out when the FY 2013 starts in October. I believe it will take a minimum of 1 quarter for EB2 ROW to be current on the VB and then another quarter to run current in terms of approvals. ROW can only give SOFAD when they are current in terms of approvals.

[gc4a_k]

i think LCA should be enough. I work in EVC model and changed my client from one location (state) to another. I only had to file for LCA.

[gc4a_k]

Does anyone know if a there is a job location change(same position) for a person in h1b. is it enough to file LCA? or should he also file amendement....

i think LCA should be enough. I work in EVC model and changed my client from one location (state) to another. I only had to file for LCA.

[Spectator]

USCIS Performance data as of March 2012 is available now ......http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Resources/Reports%20and%20Studies/Immigration%20Forms%20Data/All%20Form%20Types/all_form_types_performance_data_qtr.pdfKanmani,

Thanks for the heads up. I have been monitoring that page as well.

A couple of quick points from the data.

Employment Based I-485 Approvals were 12k higher in Q2 (43.4k) than they were in Q1 (31.5k). I would think the majority of the increase can be attributed to EB2-IC.

One thing is very clear and confirms my own suspicions. CO badly overshot the statutory limits of 27% per quarter.

27% represents 37,800 approvals per quarter, including Consular Processed cases.

This data does not include CP cases and Q2 shows 43.4k approvals for AOS cases alone.

For the Year To Date, AOS cases are at 75k versus a limit for all approvals of 75.6k.

Even allowing for all the extra approvals in Q2 as being EB2-IC with no CP cases, then CO appears to have used at least 59% of available EB visas in Q1-2 versus a limit of 54%. I had calculated a usage of 60%.

This explains the fairly severe slow down of approvals in Q3 and the retrogression that has been announced.

[Spectator]

Spec great details from you as always. Let us try to come up with ROW consumption from another angle.
- EB2 I/C probably used 22 - 24K this year. This gives ROW + M + P a wiggle room of 16 - 18K.
- When the brakes were applied that was the time they realized that EB1 will actually use up its entire cap this year, essentially EB1 would not lose anything. EB1 using its full cap was not a surprise considering that last year the Kazarian memo slowed down things, there was a huge reduction of I140 backlog and EB1C usage was quite high. Based on these factors I had made a prediction that Eb1 will probably not give any SOFAD this year.
- From Trackitt 2011 v/s 2012 approvals for EB2 ROW Primary approvals are 507 to 330.
- Now for simplicity let’s assume that EB2 ROW, M & P were all equally impacted with EB2 I/C crossing the line assuming the demands were same this year as well we saw 330/507 = .65 of the approvals from last year. For simplicity I have assumed the ROW numbers from Trackitt to represent ROW + M + P.
- Now .65 of 28 gives the range of 18. The figure of 18K gels well with the guesstimated value of 22K of what Eb2 I/C have consumed assuming the 40K allowed for EB2.
- So if we go by 18K then .35 of this i.e. ~ 6-6.5K was not satiated this year. This kind of wipes out ROW sofad for the upcoming year or at least 75% of it.
Let’s wait and see how things turn out when the FY 2013 starts in October. I believe it will take a minimum of 1 quarter for EB2 ROW to be current on the VB and then another quarter to run current in terms of approvals. ROW can only give SOFAD when they are current in terms of approvals.Teddy. Thanks for your thoughts.

I think the EB2-WW gap is anywhere up to 10k, as they seem to have used slightly over 22k to date.

To date, I would say all EB2 has used at least 45k, meaning they need a minimum of 5k spillover from EB1.

That would reduce EB1 allocation to 35k. However, EB1 might expect 4k from EB5, so they would have 39k to play with. If EB1 looks like it will exceed that figure, then Countries, or the Category would have to be retrogressed.

I think it will be mighty close.

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy. Thanks for your thoughts.

I think the EB2-WW gap is anywhere up to 10k, as they seem to have used slightly over 22k to date.

To date, I would say all EB2 has used at least 45k, meaning they need a minimum of 5k spillover from EB1.

That would reduce EB1 allocation to 35k. However, EB1 might expect 4k from EB5, so they would have 39k to play with. If EB1 looks like it will exceed that figure, then Countries, or the Category would have to be retrogressed.

I think it will be mighty close.

1. Spec I believe last year EB2 I/C got at minimum 6K SOFAD from EB2 WW. So this should peg EB2 WW usage to ~ 28K last year, I believe this is where our baselines differ.
If we use Trackitt conversion factor assuming same density in the 2 years this gives EB2 WW usage of ~ 18K. I have probably missed how you have arrived at the 22K usage v/s 18K usage for EB2 WW.

I think we are in agreement that EB2 /C seem to have used 22 - 23K.

If EB2 usage had come closer to 45K I believe CO may have put EB2 ROW as Unavailable itself rather than having it as 01-Jan-2009 to allow some more approvals of backlogged cases since even EB1 retrogression is being talked about in this case giving any numbers to Eb2 makes it worse. This is assuming the only other cushion provider EB5 may barely provide 5-6K.

I agree that the numbers are close and everything is in the margin of error so really either scenario is possible and Trackitt ratio is my big assumption. 10K Gap however definitely no SOAFD means from EB2 WW with 6.5K there is a small chance.

[Spectator]

1. Spec I believe last year EB2 I/C got at minimum 6K SOFAD from EB2 WW. So this should peg EB2 WW usage to ~ 28K last year, I believe this is where our baselines differ.
If we use Trackitt conversion factor assuming same density in the 2 years this gives EB2 WW usage of ~ 18K. I have probably missed how you have arrived at the 22K usage v/s 18K usage for EB2 WW.Teddy,

Yes, we certainly differ on that.

From the DHS figures, we know that EB2 received 66.8k visas last year, which is 26.8k over the 40k initial allocation - so spillover was 26.8k

We also know that EB1 contributed 14.8k spillover, EB4 contributed 3.2k spillover and EB5 contributed 5.9k spillover. That is a total of 23.9k spillover. EB3 effectively contributed the remainder, since they fell 2.5k short of their allocation and EB as a whole fell short of 140k.

Further, we know that China received 17.5k total EB visas and India received 33.6k total EB visas. We can estimate IC usage in the other EB Categories based on historical values.

That pretty much pegs EB2-IC SOFAD at around 33.5k, especially as we also know that EB2-C received 8.3k visas (perhaps slightly more).

If EB2-IC used 33.5k, then EB2-WW must have used 33.3k. This level would only yield 1.1k fall across within EB2 itself.

A higher calculated EB2-WW usage in FY2011 will yield higher usage numbers for FY2012. In fact, using my figure instead of 28k, you would come out at pretty much 22k.

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy,

Yes, we certainly differ on that.

From the DHS figures, we know that EB2 received 66.8k visas last year, which is 26.8k over the 40k initial allocation - so spillover was 26.8k

We also know that EB1 contributed 14.8k spillover, EB4 contributed 3.2k spillover and EB5 contributed 5.9k spillover. That is a total of 23.9k spillover. EB3 effectively contributed the remainder, since they fell 2.5k short of their allocation and EB as a whole fell short of 140k.

Further, we know that China received 17.5k total EB visas and India received 33.6k total EB visas. We can estimate IC usage in the other EB Categories based on historical values.

That pretty much pegs EB2-IC SOFAD at around 33.5k, especially as we also know that EB2-C received 8.3k visas (perhaps slightly more).

If EB2-IC used 33.5k, then EB2-WW must have used 33.3k. This level would only yield 1.1k fall across within EB2 itself.

A higher calculated EB2-WW usage in FY2011 will yield higher usage numbers for FY2012. In fact, using my figure instead of 28k, you would come out at pretty much 22k.

Thanks for the details, everything looks flawless. It is going to be gloomy situation in the upcoming year for EB2 I/C if both EB2 WW and EB1 have the same kind of demand as this year. The dates may just barely cross 2007 at this rate assuming the only SOFAD provider being EB5.

[Spectator]

Thanks for the details, everything looks flawless. It is going to be gloomy situation in the upcoming year for EB2 I/C if both EB2 WW and EB1 have the same kind of demand as this year. The dates may just barely cross 2007 at this rate assuming the only SOFAD provider being EB5.Teddy, it's not great, is it?

Fall Across from EB2-WW could be a couple of k higher, since I probably used too aggressive a figure for EB1-IC approvals. That would also raise SOFAD to 35.5k.

I still can't fathom why DOS will not publish the FY2011 Visa Statistics. They were published in January last year. Are they hiding something?

I am not quite as pessimistic as you about FY2013. Currently, I am working with 12.5k SOFAD as possible because I think EB1 can give some spillover next year.

[murali83]

Teddy, it's not great, is it?

Fall Across from EB2-WW could be a couple of k higher, since I probably used too aggressive a figure for EB1-IC approvals. That would also raise SOFAD to 35.5k.

I still can't fathom why DOS will not publish the FY2011 Visa Statistics. They were published in January last year. Are they hiding something?

I am not quite as pessimistic as you about FY2013. Currently, I am working with 12.5k SOFAD as possible

Spec and Teddy,

Thank you both for the wonderful inputs (though I am not implying the situation to be wonderful).

Spec, when you say 12.5K SOFAD, does that include the 2.8K available to EB2I by default? For FY 2013, I think we should leave China alone, they will go ahead of EB2-I just with their 2.8K.

Cheers

[Spectator]

Spec and Teddy,

Thank you both for the wonderful inputs (though I am not implying the situation to be wonderful).

Spec, when you say 12.5K SOFAD, that is without the 2.8K available to EB2I by default right? For FY 2013, I think we should leave China alone, they will go ahead of EB2-I just with their 2.8K.

Cheersmurali,

12.5k SOFAD represents the total available to EB2-IC, including the initial allocation of 5.6k.

Of that, EB2-C would receive 2.8k (only their initial allocation) and EB2-I would receive 9.7k.

Hope that clarifies it for you.

Assuming 20% of cases get left behind, that would move EB2-I to about Feb 2008 by my calculations while EB2-C would move to Jun/Aug 2008. I have assumed a fairly high Porting number, since there is effectively nearly 1.5 years worth to come in FY2013 (a normal year plus those who have had to wait for dates to become available again).

The numbers are subject to change, so that is only a preliminary guess. Please treat it as such.

[murali83]

Spec,

Thanks. I like the fact that you took a fairly high porting number. Better to be conservative in this matter. In the end if we get higher sofad and lesser porting, great, but who knows. Expect the worst and Hope for the Best

[Spectator]

Another couple of statistics from the FY2012 Q2 All Forms Report (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Resources/Reports%20and%20Studies/Immigration%20Forms%20Data/All%20Form%20Types/all_form_types_performance_data_qtr.pdf).

Compared to the same time period in the FY2011 Report, Employment Based I-485 Receipts are 58.6k higher and Employment Based I-485 Approvals are 29.0k higher.

That seems to be about in line with the predictions.

[vizcard]

Another couple of statistics from the FY2012 Q2 All Forms Report (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Resources/Reports%20and%20Studies/Immigration%20Forms%20Data/All%20Form%20Types/all_form_types_performance_data_qtr.pdf).

Compared to the same time period in the FY2011 Report, Employment Based I-485 Receipts are 58.6k higher and Employment Based I-485 Approvals are 29.0k higher.

That seems to be about in line with the predictions.

This tells me that when pushed the USCIS is capable of working faster. Of course I didn't check to see if they increased their head count but I can't imagine they increased it a whole lot.

[sandeep11]

If you are on H1B, and your initial I-129 mentioned your work location as A and your new work location B is 'not' mentioned in the I-129 then you need an ammendment. If both the locations are mentioned on the initial I-129 then you don't need an ammendment.

Location change is considered a material change and warrants a ammendment. This is what I learned from my attorney.



i think LCA should be enough. I work in EVC model and changed my client from one location (state) to another. I only had to file for LCA.

[gc4a_k]

If you are on H1B, and your initial I-129 mentioned your work location as A and your new work location B is 'not' mentioned in the I-129 then you need an ammendment. If both the locations are mentioned on the initial I-129 then you don't need an ammendment.

Location change is considered a material change and warrants a ammendment. This is what I learned from my attorney.

that i think is when you are not working under EVC model. my employer location did not change, only my client.

[suninphx]

Location change is considered a material change and warrants a ammendment. This is what I learned from my attorney.

This is a topic of ongoing debate and different attorneys have different opinions. My personal experience is that big Indian companies do not file amendement (just a LCA change). But again each case is different and one needs to go as per what company attorney advices(as there is nothing you can do by yourself...H1 being company filed petition).

[kd2008]

This is a topic of ongoing debate and different attorneys have different opinions. My personal experience is that big Indian companies do not file amendement (just a LCA change). But again each case is different and one needs to go as per what company attorney advices(as there is nothing you can do by yourself...H1 being company filed petition).

The details of change of location matter. If the move is within the same Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) then only a new LCA is needed. Otherwise an amendment is needed. This what my attorney told me as my office might be moving.

[suninphx]

The details of change of location matter. If the move is within the same Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) then only a new LCA is needed. Otherwise an amendment is needed. This what my attorney told me as my office might be moving.

As I said there is no agreement on topic 'if location change is material change or not'. USCIS has not enforced the policy in uniform way hence every attorney advices based on his/her stand. Again, nothing you can do by yourself either ways so best way is go by their advice.

[gc2008]

I guess, one needs to go for H1B amendment when location is changed. Surprise DHS visits happening more common lately. If the the visiting officer does not find the beneficiary in the location mentioned in I 129 during such visits, the officer will report USCIS that the beneficiary is not in the location mentioned in I 129. After 6 or 7 months, USCIS will send a NOIR of H1B and mostly it will result in revocation from the date on which H1B approved. So this will lead to out of status since the H1B approval date.

[suninphx]

I guess, one needs to go for H1B amendment when location is changed. Surprise DHS visits happening more common lately. If the the visiting officer does not find the beneficiary in the location mentioned in I 129 during such visits, the officer will report USCIS that the beneficiary is not in the location mentioned in I 129. After 6 or 7 months, USCIS will send a NOIR of H1B and mostly it will result in revocation from the date on which H1B approved. So this will lead to out of status since the H1B approval date.

If beneficiary is not found at the location the officer calls HR and takes new location details. And why would beneficiary out of status?

[gc2008]

If beneficiary is not found at the location the officer calls HR and takes new location details. And why would beneficiary out of status?

If the beneficiary is not present at the location mentioned in the i129, then you are right officer will call HR. Even after this officer concludes that there is no employer and employee relationship exist (and hence H1B rules been violated) as i129 was not updated and will send report to USCIS and recommend USCIS for H1B revocation. The beneficiary will be out of status as they will revoke H1B from the date of that particular H1B approval i.e they backdate the revocation. There are lot of cases effected because of this and you can find lots of discussions in trackitt and ** websites. Even Ron mentioned and it was discussed by Q before.

http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?191-Ron-Gotcher-Newsletter-H1B-Amendment-Required-on-Location-Change

Posts from trackitt:

http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/h1b/917914967/intent-to-revoke-h1b-but-i-got-ead-and-ap
http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/h1b/997758405/noir-on-h1b-received-what-to-do-please-advice
http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/h1b/918407561/h1b-intent-of-revoke

[redsox2009]

Another couple of statistics from the FY2012 Q2 All Forms Report (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Resources/Reports%20and%20Studies/Immigration%20Forms%20Data/All%20Form%20Types/all_form_types_performance_data_qtr.pdf).

Compared to the same time period in the FY2011 Report, Employment Based I-485 Receipts are 58.6k higher and Employment Based I-485 Approvals are 29.0k higher.
That seems to be about in line with the predictions.

That is beacuse last year same period no new from EB2 I & C applications were accepted and also approvals of the GC were done after March. I still think this is not something unusal as this year new 485 applications were accepted and GC's were issued. But the number is within in the range.

I remmeber last year they issued close to 43k per quarter, this year also they followed same rule and still puzzling to me what hapened to 43K visas for 3rd quarter.

[Spectator]

That is beacuse last year same period no new from EB2 I & C applications were accepted and also approvals of the GC were done after March. I still think this is not something unusal as this year new 485 applications were accepted and GC's were issued. But the number is within in the range.

I remmeber last year they issued close to 43k per quarter, this year also they followed same rule and still puzzling to me what hapened to 43K visas for 3rd quarter.
redsox,

I am aware of that. Maybe I should have spelt it out.

In fact, it is because of this that we can say that the increase is mostly due to EB2-IC, with an input from EB1 and less so from EB5. Once you net those off, it is supportive of about 23-25k EB2-IC approvals to date and somewhere around 60k EB2-IC receipts.

The maximum number of visas allowed by law to be allocated in each of the first 3 quarters is 27% (37.8k). Given that CP accounts for 10%, the USCIS figures should max out at about 34k, since they only represent AOS cases.

Last year, FY2011, the quarterly USCIS approval numbers per quarter were 24k, 22k, 36k and 41k, which reflected the fact that EB2-IC Cut Off Dates did not move forward until the May 2011 VB.

In FY2012 they have been 32k & 43k which reflects that EB2-IC Cut Off dates moved from the beginning of the year and the latest Cut Off Date in FY2012 for EB2-IC was reached in the March VB. Most people would have filed in the period reported. There will be an extra number who left it until April to file. Approvals for EB2-IC dropped off dramatically after March 23, 2012, when DOS internally retrogressed to August 15, 2007. Subsequently, about April 11, 2012, DOS internally made EB2-IC Unavailable.

I would expect the Q3 & Q4 figures to be substantially lower than the corresponding F2011 figures.

Hope that explains it better.

[veni001]

redsox,

I am aware of that. Maybe I should have spelt it out.

In fact, it is because of this that we can say that the increase is mostly due to EB2-IC, with an input from EB1 and less so from EB5. Once you net those off, it is supportive of about 23-25k EB2-IC approvals to date and somewhere around 60k EB2-IC receipts.

The maximum number of visas allowed by law to be allocated in each of the first 3 quarters is 27% (37.8k). Given that CP accounts for 10%, the USCIS figures should max out at about 34k, since they only represent AOS cases.

Last year, FY2011, the quarterly USCIS approval numbers per quarter were 24k, 22k, 36k and 41k, which reflected the fact that EB2-IC Cut Off Dates did not move forward until the May 2011 VB.

In FY2012 they have been 32k & 43k which reflects that EB2-IC Cut Off dates moved from the beginning of the year and the latest Cut Off Date in FY2012 for EB2-IC was reached in the March VB. Most people would have filed in the period reported. There will be an extra number who left it until April to file. Approvals for EB2-IC dropped off dramatically after March 23, 2012, when DOS internally retrogressed to August 15, 2007. Subsequently, about April 11, 2012, DOS internally made EB2-IC Unavailable.

I would expect the Q3 & Q4 figures to be substantially lower than the corresponding F2011 figures.

Hope that explains it better.

Spec,
Another observation is EB5 data

2011: I-526
Q1+Q2 Receipts =2,564
Q1+Q2 Approvals =1,048

2012: I-526
Q1+Q2 Receipts =2,771
Q1+Q2 Approvals =2,100

Total FY 2011 i-526 Approvals = 1,571 and EB5 used 3,340 visas. This year at mid point itself EB5 usage is about 4.5K

Dashboard data show another 3,756 i-526 pending at USCIS as of March 2012.

[Spectator]

This year at mid point itself EB5 usage is about 4.5KVeni,

Do you happen to have a source for that figure? It sounds about right, if approvals carried on at Q1 levels.

USCIS reported (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Outreach/Notes%20from%20Previous%20Engagements/Notes%20from%20Previous%20Engagements%20by%20Topic/January%20EB-5%20presentation%20FINAL.pdf) 2,364 as at January 17, 2012.

In a document (http://iiusablog.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/IIUSA-EB-5-Visa-Statistics-and-Charts-March2012.pdf) dated March 16, 2012 iiusa.org reported a figure of 2,405. That doesn't seem correct and seems to refer to Q1 rather than Q2 as shown on the slides.

USCIS did not report the EB5 visas used in the EB5 Statistics (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Outreach/Upcoming%20National%20Engagements/Upcoming%20National%20Engagement%20Pages/2012%20Events/May%202012/EB-5Stats.pdf) reported at their last EB5 Stakeholder Meeting on May 1, 2012.

[kkruna]

Any possibility that the EB2 ROW cut-off actually sprang from CO's inclusion of HR3012 into decision? I think somebody in this forum talked of this earlier. It appeared like atributing a method to random process then. Does this look any more plausible now in light of AILA's news regarding Grassley loosening his 'hold'?

[veni001]

Veni,

Do you happen to have a source for that figure? It sounds about right, if approvals carried on at Q1 levels.

USCIS reported (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Outreach/Notes%20from%20Previous%20Engagements/Notes%20from%20Previous%20Engagements%20by%20Topic/January%20EB-5%20presentation%20FINAL.pdf) 2,364 as at January 17, 2012.

In a document (http://iiusablog.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/IIUSA-EB-5-Visa-Statistics-and-Charts-March2012.pdf) dated March 16, 2012 iiusa.org reported a figure of 2,405. That doesn't seem correct and seems to refer to Q1 rather than Q2 as shown on the slides.

USCIS did not report the EB5 visas used in the EB5 Statistics (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Outreach/Upcoming%20National%20Engagements/Upcoming%20National%20Engagement%20Pages/2012%20Events/May%202012/EB-5Stats.pdf) reported at their last EB5 Stakeholder Meeting on May 1, 2012.

Spec,
My EB5 estimate is based on Q1 usage and Q2 I-526 approvals.

Veni

[yank]

Gurus,

Sorry for posting this question on this thread!

How CIS is going to address EAD/AP renewal as they have issued it for 1 yr? Is it going to be a automatic renewal as most likely visa's are not to be available? or Do we have to initiate the process?

Please share the documents required for the renewal.

[vizcard]

Gurus,

Sorry for posting this question on this thread!

How CIS is going to address EAD/AP renewal as they have issued it for 1 yr? Is it going to be a automatic renewal as most likely visa's are not to be available? or Do we have to initiate the process?

Please share the documents required for the renewal.

you will have to apply for an extension approx 3-4 months before expiration date. I don't think there are any documents required - just the form. if there are, I'm sure they are on the USCIS website along with the form.

[vedu]

Guys,

The USCIS dashboard has been updated for April, 2012. The downward trend in I-140 applications is continued. 4670 I-140 applications received in April, 2012 as compared to 7464 applications received in 2011. This is approximately 37% reduction on YoY basis.

Experts, any insights/comments?

[kd2008]

Guys,

The USCIS dashboard has been updated for April, 2012. The downward trend in I-140 applications is continued. 4670 I-140 applications received in April, 2012 as compared to 7464 applications received in 2011. This is approximately 37% reduction on YoY basis.

Experts, any insights/comments?

It is a temporary blip of slowdown. Veni pointed few pages ago that in April-May 11,000 PERMs were certified. Those will be filed with USCIS shortly and the filings for I-140 will show an increase.

[veni001]

Guys,

The USCIS dashboard has been updated for April, 2012. The downward trend in I-140 applications is continued. 4670 I-140 applications received in April, 2012 as compared to 7464 applications received in 2011. This is approximately 37% reduction on YoY basis.

Experts, any insights/comments?


It is a temporary blip of slowdown. Veni pointed few pages ago that in April-May 11,000 PERMs were certified. Those will be filed with USCIS shortly and the filings for I-140 will show an increase.

In-addition, see below for mid-year data comparison

FY2011: first-half
PERM Certifications = 35,147
I-140 Receipts = 42,096
I-140 Completions = 35,331
I-140 Approvals = 30,820 (12.76% denial rate)


FY2012: first-half
PERM Certifications = 16,556 (52.89% decrease)
I-140 Receipts = 37,143 (11.76% decrease)
I-140 Completions = 39,626
I-140 Approvals = 34,538 (12.84% denial rate)

FY2012 i-140 receipts decrease is far less compared to decrease in PERM certifications for the same period, which points towards higher EB1/EB2-NIW demand this year!

First half of FY2012 got more i-140 approvals at about the same % of i-140 denial rate, compared to FY2011.

[redsox2009]

Spec,
Another observation is EB5 data

2011: I-526
Q1+Q2 Receipts =2,564
Q1+Q2 Approvals =1,048

2012: I-526
Q1+Q2 Receipts =2,771
Q1+Q2 Approvals =2,100

Total FY 2011 i-526 Approvals = 1,571 and EB5 used 3,340 visas. This year at mid point itself EB5 usage is about 4.5K

Dashboard data show another 3,756 i-526 pending at USCIS as of March 2012.


I'm trying to understand the math and stats here. Don't misunderstand me.

As per report USCIS says 74953 GC's were issued under EB categories.

Now we know out of 74953, 40K were issued to EB2 till second half. 20k to EB3. 4.5K for EB5

so remaining 10k were issued to EB1 &EB4

If this trend continues then is it is possible we could be seeing dates moving atleast in last month that is September?

Any thoughts on this.

[Spectator]

I'm trying to understand the math and stats here. Don't misunderstand me.

As per report USCIS says 74953 GC's were issued under EB categories.

Now we know out of 74953, 40K were issued to EB2 till second half. 20k to EB3. 4.5K for EB5

so remaining 10k were issued to EB1 &EB4

If this trend continues then is it is possible we could be seeing dates moving atleast in last month that is September?

Any thoughts on this.redsox2009,

Actually it is saying USCIS used 75k visas in Q1-Q2 FY2012, which only represent AOS cases.

After you add on CP cases, it represents about 84k total visas issued.

Then you have to look at the different CP rates for Categories/Countries. For instance, only about 20% of EB5 cases are dealt with by AOS and China and Philippines both have very large CP components in EB3.

After that is taken into account, together with trends since March, it really only comes down to whether EB2 will become completely Unavailable and whether EB1 retrogresses or not IMO.

[redsox2009]

Thanks for clearing............

[self.coach]

Hello folks,

Can we create an LLC or an S Corporation or any other form of company if you are on an EAD?

I got my EAD in March 2012. Please advise.

Thanks!

[vizcard]

Hello folks,

Can we create an LLC or an S Corporation or any other form of company if you are on an EAD?

I got my EAD in March 2012. Please advise.

Thanks!

yes.. you can.

[EB2Dec2007]

Hello folks,

Can we create an LLC or an S Corporation or any other form of company if you are on an EAD?

I got my EAD in March 2012. Please advise.


Thanks!

You can create a LLC or C corp but not S corp. Here is some research I did a while back

Qualification for S corporation status

In order to make an election to be treated as an S corporation, the following requirements must be met:
• Must be an eligible entity (a domestic corporation, or a limited liability company).
• Must have only one class of stock. (See Common Stock vs Preferred Stock)
• Must not have more than 100 shareholders. • Spouses are automatically treated as a single shareholder. Families, defined as individuals descended from a common ancestor, plus spouses and former spouses of either the common ancestor or anyone lineally descended from that person, are considered a single shareholder as long as any family member elects such treatment.
• Shareholders must be U.S. citizens or residents, and must be physical entities (a person), so corporate shareholders and partnerships are to be excluded. However, certain tax-exempt corporations, notably 501(c)(3) corporations, are permitted to be shareholders.

• Profits and losses must be allocated to shareholders proportionately to each one's interest in the business.

If a corporation that has elected to be treated as an S corporation ceases to meet the requirements (for example, if as a result of stock transfers, the number of shareholders exceeds 100 or an ineligible shareholder such as a nonresident alien acquires a share), the corporation will lose its S corporation status and revert to being a regular C corporation.

[RGVJSR]

Dear Members,

Kindly excuse me if this is posted as off thread topic.My spouse was nearing full term pregnancy and planning to go on FMLA leave. Both of us are in AOS pending status and working with EAD. Can she claim DI benefits during this leave ? Will it affect our GC approval at later stage ? Please share the information U have.
Thanks for your time and attention.
-RGVJSR

[vizcard]

Dear Members,

Kindly excuse me if this is posted as off thread topic.My spouse was nearing full term pregnancy and planning to go on FMLA leave. Both of us are in AOS pending status and working with EAD. Can she claim DI benefits during this leave ? Will it affect our GC approval at later stage ? Please share the information U have.
Thanks for your time and attention.
-RGVJSR

First of all, congratulations and all the best with the rest of the pregnancy.

To answer your question -
Yes - As long as she maintains employment status with her employer and she gets the DI through a program from her employer. That's what I've been told anyway.I would strongly recommend to check with her HR / Benefits provider to confirm. Check with your lawyers too (I'm assuming you were the primary on the GC app).

[qesehmk]

If she is beneficiary on your application - then there is absolutely no problem at all since it is not a requirement that secondary applicant be employed.

Even if she is primary and you are beneficiary - I am 99% confident that FMLA is applicable to AOS candidates and that FMLA leave by itself shouldn't be disruptive or hamful to 485 approval.


Dear Members,

Kindly excuse me if this is posted as off thread topic.My spouse was nearing full term pregnancy and planning to go on FMLA leave. Both of us are in AOS pending status and working with EAD. Can she claim DI benefits during this leave ? Will it affect our GC approval at later stage ? Please share the information U have.
Thanks for your time and attention.
-RGVJSR

[shashimohan]

Hello,
Thank you for this forum. Gurus please can you provide suggestions. My problem is as follows: I am in my 7th year of H1 with I140 approved. I have been offered a new position by another firm, but as per this new firms immigration team, they cant transfer my H1 at this stage and have to wait for pending I485 for 6 months. Please let me know if there is any other option or does this suggest, I have to wait to make a switch till I485 is pending for 6 months.

[vizcard]

Hello,
Thank you for this forum. Gurus please can you provide suggestions. My problem is as follows: I am in my 7th year of H1 with I140 approved. I have been offered a new position by another firm, but as per this new firms immigration team, they cant transfer my H1 at this stage and have to wait for pending I485 for 6 months. Please let me know if there is any other option or does this suggest, I have to wait to make a switch till I485 is pending for 6 months.

They can transfer the H1 if they want to. But they would have to restart the GC process. You will still retain your current PD. If you wait the 6 months, you can work on EAD and not have to do anything else. That's a personal choice.

My 2 cents - Unless your PD is before Dec 2007, I would take the job and try to convince them to transfer the H1 and restart the GC process. Labor will probably take a year max. Then you can always file I140 with premium processing and 485 later or if you are current, you can file concurrently. There's also the factor that the company may not sponsor GC immediately so that's got to be established up front.

PS: My guess is that new firm doesn't want to spend the money to the entire immigration process (H1 transfer, Labor, I140, I485, etc.). If it really is a money issue, you could offer to split the bill or something like that.

[Spectator]

Make of it what you will. I haven't fully digested it myself yet. http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17533&p=74215#post74215


New information just posted by AILA

Visa Office Update on Priority Dates and Demand (Updated 6/27/12)

Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 12012349 (posted Jun. 27, 2012)"

On Tuesday, June 19, 2012, Roberta Freedman, AILA Students & Scholars Committee member, discussed the Visa Bulletin, visa demand in the employment preference categories, and predictions for FY2012 and beyond with Charlie Oppenheim of the Visa Office. Here are notes from that discussion:

2012 and 2013 News

In October 2012 (beginning of the 2013 fiscal year), the EB-2 cut-off dates for China-Mainland born and India, which are currently "unavailable," will move to August or September 2007 (China may be slightly better). It is unlikely that the cut-off dates will move forward at all for the first two quarters of FY2013. If they do, it will only be if the Visa Office is convinced that there is insufficient demand for the rest of the year.

Mr. Oppenheim's office already has 17,000 EB-2 cases for natives of India, China, and worldwide with priority dates after January 1, 2009, pre-adjudicated. There will be a lot of cases queued up for adjudication in October 2012, and it will take some time to get through them.

EB-2 worldwide will be current in October 2012.

If USCIS approves many pending cases during the month of June, the worldwide EB-2 category may retrogress or become unavailable for the rest of the year.

Why did the priority dates move ahead so far and then retrogress so drastically?

USCIS encouraged Mr. Oppenheim's office to move the categories forward so much in January, February, and March of 2012. USCIS reported that they had a lot of approved petitions but they were not receiving enough I-485s.

USCIS wanted the cut-off dates moved even more in March 2012, but DOS resisted, since there already appeared to be heavy demand.

In February, the demand had already increased 50%. In addition, USCIS said that they believed that adjudication of EB-1 cases would be at the same rate as last fiscal year, and this was not the case. It could be due to the fact that many EB-1 cases had very long adjudication times with USCIS. In addition, EB-5 usage has been higher this year. Unused EB-5 cases fall into EB-1, and unused EB-1 cases fall into EB-2.

Applicants from China and India who filed will be waiting years for adjudication of their I-485s.

USCIS also advised a 4-6 month timeline in the processing of I-485s, and then they processed a lot of cases in 3 months, which increased the demand as well for visa numbers this fiscal year.

The group of cases that were filed in July and August of 2007, when all employment-based categories were made "current," were all completed by November 2011, and at that point, Mr. Oppenheim's office had to depend on USCIS estimates for adjudication of cases. Mr. Oppenheim's office had no pre-adjudicated cases that gave him a point of reference to determine what was left or pending.


Mr. Oppenheim's office has been very clear that they do not like retrogression.


Going forward:

Another problem with trying to predict the demand is that no one is keeping statistics on EB-3-EB-2 "upgrades." Upgrades continue to be a big "wildcard," as no one knows how many are being used per year and no one is tracking it. Mr. Oppenheim confirmed his previous comments that both cases for a person remain open (so it looks like two numbers are being used) if a person is upgrading from EB-3 to EB-2, and only when the green card is approved does the duplicate file number go away. At that time, Mr. Oppenheim's office is told by USCIS to cancel a pending EB-3 case.

Mr. Oppenheim's office believes that there are 10,000 to 15,000 numbers used for upgrades every fiscal year. In March 2012, alone, 3,200 numbers were used to approve China and India adjustments that were EB-3-EB-2 upgrades. The actual break down was 2,800 from India and 500 from China.

All of these cases had priority dates before 2007, so clearly, they were upgrades. For example, 363 of the 2,800 EB-2 cases from India that were approved in March 2012, had a 2005 priority date. In March 2012, alone, over 1,000 numbers were used for applications from the worldwide quota that had priority dates before 2010, so these were likely upgrades as well.

USCIS previously insisted that the number of upgrade cases was insignificant.

Mr. Oppenheim's office tries to use 13,500 visas per quarter for all EB cases. This office already has more than 17,000 in line for FY2013.

[openaccount]

Spec-

This clearly confirms that EB3-EB2 porting for IC are at a minimum of 5-6k( it could be >6k) per year

so based on what happened this year and the current demand, i think it is almost impossible for EB2I to even cross Dec2007 PD in FY2013

[shashimohan]

Thank you vizcard. The new firm will only apply for green card after an year of employment, in that case how can they even transfer the visa because the extension is currently just because of the gc process in place. I might be sounding funny, but dont know how things work when one is in 7th year of visa.

[Spectator]

Spec-

This clearly confirms that EB3-EB2 porting for IC are at a minimum of 5-6k( it could be >6k) per year

so based on what happened this year and the current demand, i think it is almost impossible for EB2I to even cross Dec2007 PD in FY2013openaccount,

At 6k, unless EB2-I gets a lot more visas than I am thinking at present or a large number of early cases do not get adjudicated, it looks very difficult.

I still need to look at what was said a bit more and think it through though. For example, March 2012 was not a "normal" month. USCIS were in hyperdrive in February and March.

Even CO said no figures are being kept by USCIS. If his "guess" is anywhere near accurate, then it is sobering news. First thoughts are it sounds a little high, although the numbers we have been using are probably too low in light of the information.

In many ways, CO's comments on EB2-C and EB2-ROW numbers were at least as interesting.

[pch053]

Doesn't CO's estimate of 10,000 to 15,000 numbers used for Eb3->EB2 upgrades every fiscal year seem to be on the higher side? We don't see EB3 pending #'s decreasing at that rate, even considering that there are more CP cases for EB3 as compared to EB2. It also seems that they won't be opening the floodgates for EB2-I/C folks anytime soon; the PD's will move forward more based on demand - supply ratio.

[Spectator]

Doesn't CO's estimate of 10,000 to 15,000 numbers used for Eb3->EB2 upgrades every fiscal year seem to be on the higher side? We don't see EB3 pending #'s decreasing at that rate, even considering that there are more CP cases for EB3 as compared to EB2. It also seems that they won't be opening the floodgates for EB2-I/C folks anytime soon; the PD's will move forward more based on demand - supply ratio.pch,

I agree CO seems to overestimate the numbers based on what we can deduce the numbers might be (which is only for India anyway).

On the other hand we do not see the entire picture and really I don't think we have been considering either China or ROW as having any significant Porting numbers.

That latter point is more interesting to me. Suddenly, WW using 30k a year may not be so unfathomable and we may have been underestimating EB2-C numbers.

We always seem to come back to Teddy's original figure of 6k for India. Add half as many for all other Countries and we approach the lower bound of CO's "guesstimate".

Remember, IC only had 6 months where Porting applications could be approved this year. The door was slammed shut in early April by internal retrogression to Unavailable.

[openaccount]

hr 3012 could be one of the reasons for surge in EB ROW porting numbers this year

[justvisiting]

A WW EB-3 who applied in say, 2008, would have never filed an I-485 and would not appear in the USCIS inventory. If that applicant upgrades to EB-2, which until now has always been current, he would have not appeared in that demand data either.

[Spectator]

A WW EB-3 who applied in say, 2008, would have never filed an I-485 and would not appear in the USCIS inventory. If that applicant upgrades to EB-2, which until now has always been current, he would have not appeared in that demand data either.justvisiting,

A very well made point.

[pch053]

I think Spec and justvisiting's points make a lot of sense and the overall porting #'s (I+C+ROW) might very well reach 9K (6K from I + 3K from C + ROW). Plus, as mentioned, for ROW, the range of porting dates will span PD's from 2006 - 2011/2012 whereas for I + C it will be PD's in the range of 2002 - 2007. Since their data never made it to UCIS inventory, I think it will be tough to get a ballpark of how many ROW's with post Aug'07 PD has ported from EB3 -> EB2.

[Mavrick]

"Mr. Oppenheim's office already has 17,000 EB-2 cases for natives of India, China, and worldwide with priority dates after January 1, 2009, pre-adjudicated. "

Do we agree that there are only 17K demand for EB-2(all) post Jan 2009(Jan 2009 - April 2010)? I for some reason think the figures are low because if we take out ROW from the equation, the numbers will go down to roughly 15K

[vishnu]

ya thesse grand CO predictions are so random :)
if indeed it is just 17k, i would actually be quite optimistic for date movement...
the 15000 porting figure sounds very high, and if so, then eb3 inventory should reduce dramatically (which has not materialized?)

[vizcard]

Thank you vizcard. The new firm will only apply for green card after an year of employment, in that case how can they even transfer the visa because the extension is currently just because of the gc process in place. I might be sounding funny, but dont know how things work when one is in 7th year of visa.

Some theoretical background
First of all, you have to decouple the H1 process from the EB GC process. I think Q and others have reiterated that GC is for "future employment". H1 is for current employment. A company can apply for GC even when one is on OPT (post US-based degree).

As for H1, any H1 past 6 yrs is based on an approved Labor (1 yr) or approved I140 (3 yrs). Once you have an approved H1, you can work regardless of whether or not there is an underlying GC application. So if you change jobs pre-180 days, the likely scenario is that your current company will cancel the underlying I140. However, that won't impact your current H1B as it already has been approved. You may now work on the H1B (appropriately transferred) till the expiration date or further extend it using an approved Labor or I140.

Point of warning - you cannot extend your current H1 if you don't have an approved Labor or I140. That is the only difference between the first 6 yrs and past that.

Your case
There is also another potential solution to your situation. I don't know the exact mechanics (perhaps someone else can explain in more detail). But if you can convince your current company to not cancel the underlying I140, you could transfer your H1, start work at the new company and then once the 180 days are up, you change your "sponsoring employer" to the new company.

Sorry for the long post but I tried to put in as many details. If you need more info, just PM me separately and we can keep this thread to calculations.

[openaccount]

Another problem with trying to predict the demand is that no one is keeping statistics on EB-3-EB-2 "upgrades." Upgrades continue to be a big "wildcard," as no one knows how many are being used per year and no one is tracking it. Mr. Oppenheim confirmed his previous comments that both cases for a person remain open (so it looks like two numbers are being used) if a person is upgrading from EB-3 to EB-2, and only when the green card is approved does the duplicate file number go away. At that time, Mr. Oppenheim's office is told by USCIS to cancel a pending EB-3 case.

well looks like USCIS is delaying in reporting porting cases to DOS .

Spec, could this be the reason for less(i think it is 1500 or 2000) EB3 visa usage in FY2011. As USCIS is not able to report porting cases CO cannot see actual EB3 demand as some numbers might have been already approved in EB2, this might have resulted in less EB3 consumption in 2011

[Mavrick]

Thanks, Vishnu.

Q & Spec, any thoughts?

[Spectator]

"Mr. Oppenheim's office already has 17,000 EB-2 cases for natives of India, China, and worldwide with priority dates after January 1, 2009, pre-adjudicated. "

Do we agree that there are only 17K demand for EB-2(all) post Jan 2009(Jan 2009 - April 2010)? I for some reason think the figures are low because if we take out ROW from the equation, the numbers will go down to roughly 15KMavrick,

I read that to mean that DOS is aware of 17k Demand for all EB2-IC cases of all PDs and Worldwide applicants with a PD later than Jan 1, 2009.

In fact the Worldwide numbers should be close to zero (consisting only of cases reported by Consulates for August), since no AOS cases can become pre-adjudicated until July 1, 2012 - any AOS cases will simply be approved and not fall to the Pending file we know as the Demand Data.

EB2-Worldwide cases would only begin to hit the Demand Data in any numbers if DOS has already made EB2-Worldwide Unavailable internally already. I don't think that happened, even though EB2-Worldwide case approvals have slowed down, judging by Trackitt.

[Spectator]

ya thesse grand CO predictions are so random :)
if indeed it is just 17k, i would actually be quite optimistic for date movement...
the 15000 porting figure sounds very high, and if so, then eb3 inventory should reduce dramatically (which has not materialized?)vishnu,

That is 17k as of June 19, 2012, which will contain a few hundred Worldwide numbers at best.

By October, the number will be massively larger.

[IsItWorthTheTrouble]

So, based on CO's statements, what's the likely cut-off month when FY13 ends? Also, in light of this statement, should we expect a 'retrogression' in the next bulletin that USCIS wouldn't be able to get the dates back to May '10 by spring '13.

[qesehmk]

The 15K cliam is a bit outrageous. However, I am 100% confident that the ONLY way it could be true is IFF (if and only if!) EB3IC from 2007-8-9-10 have been converting to EB2 and it started showing up only after all these date movements of EB2IC.

If you think about it - that gels very well with out original theory of 3-6K total porting per year.

So while that may be true - I am not quite worried ... since then that 15K is already baked into all the filings until 2010 for EB2IC.

Makes sense? Critique this.


Thanks, Vishnu.

Q & Spec, any thoughts?

[pdfeb09]

The 15K cliam is a bit outrageous. However, I am 100% confident that the ONLY way it could be true is IFF (if and only if!) EB3IC from 2007-8-9-10 have been converting to EB2 and it started showing up only after all these date movements of EB2IC.

If you think about it - that gels very well with out original theory of 3-6K total porting per year.

So while that may be true - I am not quite worried ... since then that 15K is already baked into all the filings until 2010 for EB2IC.

Makes sense? Critique this.

"All of these cases had priority dates before 2007, so clearly, they were upgrades. For example, 363 of the 2,800 EB-2 cases from India that were approved in March 2012, had a 2005 priority date."

Q, I think the only way they can tell if it was an upgrade is to ensure that the PD was prior to 2007. Otherwise there is no way to tell if it was an upgrade unless the GC is actually issued and the related case taken off of USIS' inventory.

EDIT: I do feel that 15K is huge and improbable. Given the hoops people have to jump through to pull off the upgrade in a tough economy. However if this is true, we have a loooooooooong wait coming up.

[Jonty Rhodes]

We all talked about this possibility, cautious allocation of visa numbers in FY2013, and possibility of CO not doing a quarterly spillover in FY2013 when July VB came out and this is not surprising at all but nevertheless posting it here since saw this on Oh law firm website.

06/28/2012: Unconfirmed FY-2013 (10/01/2012-09/30/2013) Employment-Based Visa Cut-Off Dates Prediction

Determination of visa cut-off dates for the monthly Visa Bulletin relies on so many variable or even unpredictable consumption of visa demands by the USCIS and Visa Posts throughout the world. In the employment-based immigration cases, reportedly 85% to 90% numbers are consumed by the USCIS for the EB-485 approvals. What will be demands from EB-485 applications in the new fiscal year is anyone's game of speculation, but unconfirmed sources indicate as follows based on some information from the Department of State:

The world-wide cut-off date for EB-2 is likely to change to "Current" in October 2012, meaning that there will be no EB-2 visa number regression coming October 1, 2012 for the world-wide countries other than India and China.

EB-2 cut-off date for India and China is likely to move back to August or September 2007, the previous cut-off date before it became unavailable lately. Again the same unconfirmed sources indicate that the new October 2012 cut-off date for India and China EB-2 may not further progress for the first two quarters of FY 2013 which ends on March 31, 2013.

The foregoing prediction will be wiped out if the Congress passes H.R. 3012, eliminating employment-based visa per country annual limitation.

[vizcard]

Someone really needs to pass on COs comments to the Senate. His words essentially say that an applicant is "approved" but cannot get his/ her green card because of the numbers game. In other words its not a matter of if but its a matter of when.

[openaccount]

here is what i think might happen if similar numbers/demand repeats in FY2013 across EB categories

In 2012 EB2IC received approximately 24k SOFAD below is break down

5.6k+18.4 SO.
EB2ROW is almost 'U' for 2012 Q4 & there are indications from DOS about EB1 having cutoff date in Aug/Sept this implies around 8-9k visas were allocated to EB2IC which should have gone to EB2ROW/EB1 in 2012. If this was the case EB2IC should have got 5.6k+10k(18.4-8.4)---15.6k in 2012, EB2IC got an excess of about 8-9k this year.

Next year if SOFAD is 15.6k then EB2ROW/EB1 will consume at least 5-6k more than what was consumed in 2013 as demand from 2012 is carried over into 2013, that brings SOFAD to EB2IC in 2013 to 15.6-5.6-->10k. EB2C will use not more than 2.8 k. EB2I will get around 7-8k, EB3-EB2 porting will be around 5-6k.

3 scenarios for EB2I in FY2013:

1)SOFAD 8k--EB2I PD--Oct/Nov2007
2)SOFAD 10K--EB2I PD-- Dec2007
3)SOFAD 13k--This is possible only if EB1/EB2ROW/EB5 demand decreases in
2013. This will take EB2I PD to Jan/Feb2008

Again this is assuming that EB1/EB2ROW/EB5 demand and Eb3-Eb2 porting will be similar to FY2012. It might be to early to predict but based on I-140/Perm/Porting numbers, I am expecting 2013 will be no different than 2012 in terms of EB1/EB2ROW/EB5 demand and Eb3-Eb2 porting

[cricfan]

Hi All,

This is a completely unrelated question. I will delete the question once it is answered.

I am going to visit India in 1st week of Sep' 12. I have a valid EAD/AP combo card. However, my indian passport will be valid for less than 6 months when I return back. Will this create any problem for me while departing India or at POE here in US ?
I plan to use AP to enter US.

[gaikwrr]

Hi Cricfan,
I would suggest you to get the passport renewed here in US as soon as possible. It is very easy and takes about a week if you go to Indian Consulate here in US in person. It is always safe to travel with a passport valid for more than 6 months at any POE.

[veni001]

Thanks, Vishnu.

Q & Spec, any thoughts?


The 15K cliam is a bit outrageous. However, I am 100% confident that the ONLY way it could be true is IFF (if and only if!) EB3IC from 2007-8-9-10 have been converting to EB2 and it started showing up only after all these date movements of EB2IC.

If you think about it - that gels very well with out original theory of 3-6K total porting per year.

So while that may be true - I am not quite worried ... since then that 15K is already baked into all the filings until 2010 for EB2IC.

Makes sense? Critique this.

Agree, PERM Certification Vs I140 data (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?49-140-Data-and-EB1-Demand-Calculations) is also not pointing towards high porting numbers.

We beat porting calculations to death in FY2011 thread (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?4-EB2-Predictions-%28Rather-Calculations%29-2011/page46).

[qesehmk]

I missed where it says all these cases were 2007 or earlier. If that's what CO is saying then it absolutely is wrong unless he is referring to all portings in last 2-3 years.

If he is referring to portings that happened this year (regardless of the PD year), the number is huge but it is possible if the PDs correspond to all years but especially 2007-2010.

See a porting case is not going to be ported until they have to adjudicate it. Now when will something get adjudicated? ONly after the date is current.

So think about all the EB3s from 2007-2010. They can't port until the date becomes current. So theoretically its possible that 3-6K per year from those years may get ported.

However what is not so intuitive is - why would somebody file EB3 in 2010 and then immediately port it in 2 years in 2012? And will there be thousands like that?

I don't really know.

Veni you mentioned that the data doesnt support. I am not sure I understood. I think those 15K should be already part of all the labors and 485s. They are not incremental to the approved PERMs.


"All of these cases had priority dates before 2007, so clearly, they were upgrades. For example, 363 of the 2,800 EB-2 cases from India that were approved in March 2012, had a 2005 priority date."

Q, I think the only way they can tell if it was an upgrade is to ensure that the PD was prior to 2007. Otherwise there is no way to tell if it was an upgrade unless the GC is actually issued and the related case taken off of USIS' inventory.

EDIT: I do feel that 15K is huge and improbable. Given the hoops people have to jump through to pull off the upgrade in a tough economy. However if this is true, we have a loooooooooong wait coming up.

[qesehmk]

Veni - even if you port - you still file 140 right? So there is really no way to tell how many portings are there other than looking at trackitt and finding out EB3s getting approved with PDs that are NOT current.

Agree, PERM Certification Vs I140 data (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?49-140-Data-and-EB1-Demand-Calculations) is also not pointing towards high porting numbers.

We beat porting calculations to death in FY2011 thread (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?4-EB2-Predictions-%28Rather-Calculations%29-2011/page46).

[Spectator]

Veni - even if you port - you still file 140 right? So there is really no way to tell how many portings are there other than looking at trackitt and finding out EB3s getting approved with PDs that are NOT current.Q,

Without fully understanding what Veni is saying, I agree.

I don't think Trackitt can really give really good information about Porting either.

To date, 63 EB3-I cases have been approved when the PD wasn't Current, but the majority of Porters actually remember to change the Preference Category to EB2.

There are a further 190 cases shown under EB2-I with a PD before 2007.

That would suggest a figure of 4-6k, but it is probably more complicated than that.

Other Countries are virtually impossible to pick up. EB2-ROW has 84 approvals prior to 2011, but these represent a mixture of Porters, Cross Chargeability and cases that just took a long time to adjudicate. Perhaps I will go through them thoroughly one day.

It has been and continues to be the most difficult figure to derive from the data available to us.

[veni001]

Q,

Without fully understanding what Veni is saying, I agree.
.............................
.............................

It has been and continues to be the most difficult figure to derive from the data available to us.


Veni - even if you port - you still file 140 right? So there is really no way to tell how many portings are there other than looking at trackitt and finding out EB3s getting approved with PDs that are NOT current.

Q,
That's correct.

First, FY2012 PERM Vs 140 data (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?49-140-Data-and-EB1-Demand-Calculations) to-date points towards higher EB1/EB2-NIW.

Second, Unless half of the PERM certifications are for EB3-->EB2 porting, 15K number is not a possibility.

If porting is anywhere near 15K then based on PERM certifications and 140 data future EB2 as well as EB3 demand should be very low!

I agree with Spec, this has been the most difficult number for us to deduce from the data available to us.

[Spectator]

Q,
That's correct.

First, FY2012 PERM Vs 140 data (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?49-140-Data-and-EB1-Demand-Calculations) to-date points towards higher EB1/EB2-NIW.

Second, Unless half of the PERM certifications are for EB3-->EB2 porting, 15K number is not a possibility.

If porting is anywhere near 15K then based on PERM certifications and 140 data future EB2 as well as EB3 demand should be very low!

I agree with Spec, this has been the most difficult number for us to deduce from the data available to us.Veni,

Thanks for the explanation. I understand now.

I had a look at the EB2-ROW cases.

About a quarter of approvals with PDs before 2011 are Cross Chargeability.

Only 3 were provable as EB3-EB2 porting.

I have looked at a fair number of the remainder. Some were definitely caused by the PERM going into audit for a very long time, and most of the others are explainable for the same reason. Some could have been EB2-EB2 but there is no direct evidence for that.

EB3-ROW approvals have 3 definite Porting cases where the PD was not Current at the time of approval.

Conclusion - Trackitt data can't tell us anything about ROW Porting. I pretty much knew that already, but this, for me at least, confirms it.

It is good to revisit the subject from time to time, but I'm not sure anything has changed since the last time it was discussed, other than CO's "guesstimates" and the fact that we should perhaps give more weight to Chinese and ROW porting numbers.

[cricfan]

Hi Cricfan,
I would suggest you to get the passport renewed here in US as soon as possible. It is very easy and takes about a week if you go to Indian Consulate here in US in person. It is always safe to travel with a passport valid for more than 6 months at any POE.

Thanks gaikwrr.

[kd2008]

Veni,

Thanks for the explanation. I understand now.

I had a look at the EB2-ROW cases.

About a quarter of approvals with PDs before 2011 are Cross Chargeability.

Only 3 were provable as EB3-EB2 porting.

I have looked at a fair number of the remainder. Some were definitely caused by the PERM going into audit for a very long time, and most of the others are explainable for the same reason. Some could have been EB2-EB2 but there is no direct evidence for that.

EB3-ROW approvals have 3 definite Porting cases where the PD was not Current at the time of approval.

Conclusion - Trackitt data can't tell us anything about ROW Porting. I pretty much knew that already, but this, for me at least, confirms it.

It is good to revisit the subject from time to time, but I'm not sure anything has changed since the last time it was discussed, other than CO's "guesstimates" and the fact that we should perhaps give more weight to Chinese and ROW porting numbers.

Instead of chatting with AILA, Mr. CO needs to sit down with you and have a very long discussion. I am pretty sure after this chat there never ever will be unexpected movements followed by retrogression. :D

My take on the issue is this: the semantics of porting or upgraders is irrelevant. For us the what matter is the reduction in pending demand of EB3. This is the ultimate source of numbers being consumed either through actual EB3 usage or porting to EB2.

One of the reasons that EB3 usage was lower than actual quota last year may be this: USCIS never bothered to tell Mr. CO to remove duplicates in EB3 resulting from porting. So Mr. CO did not move EB3 dates aggressively. USCIS simply said to Mr. CO it is ok, we will used them in EB2 as these folks have upgraded any ways.

[self.coach]

I applied for i-485 in Feb and got EAD in March, I am still within the 6months duration for both events. My H1 expires on Sept 2013.

I wasnt able to find my own previous post (duh), but earlier I had asked if I can open a LLC/C-corp/S-corp while on EAD.
The consensus was yes.

Now, if I have an opportunity to get consulting fees from a business - can I get it on my SSN as I have EAD now, or should I go the LLC route? The business has asked me to fill up this form "W-9 Request for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification" in order to get paid and it already owes me money. Please advise how I shguld get paid.

[Eb2_Dec07]

Guys ,

I got a missing section on medical form RFE last week and my attorney responded back to USCIS that changed the status to RFE response review. Now at this point, since my dates are not current , what am I to interpret my status ?

Mine is a dependent EAD based on spouse I 485 ( Already approved ) .

Can I switch for another job , currently on H1b .

[vizcard]

I applied for i-485 in Feb and got EAD in March, I am still within the 6months duration for both events. My H1 expires on Sept 2013.

I wasnt able to find my own previous post (duh), but earlier I had asked if I can open a LLC/C-corp/S-corp while on EAD.
The consensus was yes.

Now, if I have an opportunity to get consulting fees from a business - can I get it on my SSN as I have EAD now, or should I go the LLC route? The business has asked me to fill up this form "W-9 Request for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification" in order to get paid and it already owes me money. Please advise how I shguld get paid.

You can use your SSN for now but it would be wise to create a business (LLC or Sole Proprietorship) to be able to deduct business expenses when you file your tax return. Otherwise all the income you earn will be considered personal income and taxed accordingly.

Link to the response for you earlier post - > http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?148-EB2-Predictions-(Rather-Calculations)-2012&p=28153#post28153

[vizcard]

Guys ,

I got a missing section on medical form RFE last week and my attorney responded back to USCIS that changed the status to RFE response review. Now at this point, since my dates are not current , what am I to interpret my status ?

Mine is a dependent EAD based on spouse I 485 ( Already approved ) .

Can I switch for another job , currently on H1b .
Your status is still the same - 485 pending. Also, you can switch jobs as long as your EAD is valid. Keep a close watch on the expiration date and make sure you apply for renewal 3-4 months in advance of expiration.

[Eb2_Dec07]

Your status is still the same - 485 pending. Also, you can switch jobs as long as your EAD is valid. Keep a close watch on the expiration date and make sure you apply for renewal 3-4 months in advance of expiration.

Thanks Vizcard .... another question..since mine is a dependent EAD, when filing extension , is being employed a pre-requisite or irrelevant ...thank you

[vizcard]

Thanks Vizcard .... another question..since mine is a dependent EAD, when filing extension , is being employed a pre-requisite or irrelevant ...thank you

Irrelevant. The EAD application is based on a pending 485 so as long as your 485 is pending, you can have EAD. Same with AP btw.

[bieber]

Your status is still the same - 485 pending. Also, you can switch jobs as long as your EAD is valid. Keep a close watch on the expiration date and make sure you apply for renewal 3-4 months in advance of expiration.

vizcard, how early one can apply for extension of EAD/AP

[vizcard]

vizcard, how early one can apply for extension of EAD/AP

Not sure. But the processing time is 3 months and with the new Obama amnesty law it might be longer. I'd plan for a 4 month window.

[Spectator]

vizcard, how early one can apply for extension of EAD/APbieber,

You cannot currently apply for renewal more than 120 days from expiration. If you do, you risk rejection of the application.

For example, from this document (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/About%20Us/Electronic%20Reading%20Room/Customer%20Service%20Reference%20Guide/Employment_Authorization.pdf)


When should I file for an extension of my employment authorization?

You should not file more than 120 days before the expiration date shown on your current employment authorization document; however, you should file 90 days before the expiration date.

[yank]

Please let me know risk associated with changing an employer after completing 180 days with old employer. I have a full time job offer and want to accept this offer. Is filing AC-21 will impact my 485?

[veni001]

Please let me know risk associated with changing an employer after completing 180 days with old employer. I have a full time job offer and want to accept this offer. Is filing AC-21 will impact my 485?

yank,
As long as your new job is in the same/similar field, you can use Ac21 and switch employers after 180 days from 485 filing date.

[kingjeremy]

Need advice from experts

I have a PD of Nov 2010 and have received my EAD/AP. My wife is a dependent application and she also has received her EAD/AP. She is currently working on a H1-B visa which expires end of 2013. Her employer is willing to separately file for her Green Card, however, she is struggling to obtain experience letter, et al from her older employer. Also there's a cost associated with filing a separate Green Card for her. Do you think she even needs to file a separate Green Card or can she continue to be on EAD? My fear is if our I-485 application gets denied for some reason (not sure if that even happens) or if my Company lays me off, etc. what would happen to her application? We have a house and want to be sure at least one of us can work full time :)

Any advice will be much appreciated....we want to take a calculated risk.

Many thanks,

KingJeremy

[vizcard]

Need advice from experts

I have a PD of Nov 2010 and have received my EAD/AP. My wife is a dependent application and she also has received her EAD/AP. She is currently working on a H1-B visa which expires end of 2013. Her employer is willing to separately file for her Green Card, however, she is struggling to obtain experience letter, et al from her older employer. Also there's a cost associated with filing a separate Green Card for her. Do you think she even needs to file a separate Green Card or can she continue to be on EAD? My fear is if our I-485 application gets denied for some reason (not sure if that even happens) or if my Company lays me off, etc. what would happen to her application? We have a house and want to be sure at least one of us can work full time :)

Any advice will be much appreciated....we want to take a calculated risk.

Many thanks,

KingJeremy

Nov 2010 PD ? Is that a typo ?

Anyway to answer your question - If her company is willing to sponsor her GC might as well do it. I get the sense you want to be really safe due to the house situation. So I'd wouldn't worry about the few hundred dollars to be safe.

[bieber]

bieber,

You cannot currently apply for renewal more than 120 days from expiration. If you do, you risk rejection of the application.

For example, from this document (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/About%20Us/Electronic%20Reading%20Room/Customer%20Service%20Reference%20Guide/Employment_Authorization.pdf)

awesome, thanks Spec

[openaccount]

EB3-EB2 porting approvals from trackitt in last 3 years, these are approvals for that FY with PD< PD of previous FY.

FY---------Previous FY Sept VB EB2PD-----Trackitt EB2 approvals with PD<EB2PD(which should be EB3-EB2)
2010---------JAN 2005------------------------------257
2011---------MAY 2006-----------------------------237
2012---------APR 2007-----------------------------286
(April)

FY2012 till April has 286 it would have been more if there was no internal retrogression starting April. Trackitt porting approvals doubled in FY2012 compared to FY2011.

[kd2008]

http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Resources/Reports%20and%20Studies/Immigration%20Forms%20Data/Employment-based/I526_I829_performancedata.pdf

LOL! At this rate we may see a cut off for EB5 soon!

[Spectator]

http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Resources/Reports%20and%20Studies/Immigration%20Forms%20Data/Employment-based/I526_I829_performancedata.pdf

LOL! At this rate we may see a cut off for EB5 soon!kd,

Unfortunately, that is just a re-publication of the first page of more comprehensive statistics (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Outreach/Upcoming%20National%20Engagements/Upcoming%20National%20Engagement%20Pages/2012%20Events/May%202012/EB-5Stats.pdf) that were released previously after the May 1, 2012 EB5 Stakeholder Meeting.

Crucially, it does not tell us how many EB5 visas were used to the end of Q2.

We know from a previous USCIS document (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Outreach/Notes%20from%20Previous%20Engagements/Notes%20from%20Previous%20Engagements%20by%20Topic/January%20EB-5%20presentation%20FINAL.pdf) (last page) that 2,364 visas were used by EB5 in FY2012 up to January 17, 2012 compared to 3,463 for all of FY2011. EB5 can probably (hopefully) stay within the 10k for this year.

At best, I don't think we can rely on any spillover from EB5 beyond FY2013 and at worst we have already seen the last in FY2011.

The next EB5 Stakeholder Meeting is a teleconference only event on July 26,2012, but that is focussed on Regional Centers, so there may not be a new release of EB5 Statistics.

The next EB5 Stakeholder Meeting focussing on General EB5 issues isn't scheduled until 23 October, 2012.

[kingjeremy]

Nov 2010 PD ? Is that a typo ?

Anyway to answer your question - If her company is willing to sponsor her GC might as well do it. I get the sense you want to be really safe due to the house situation. So I'd wouldn't worry about the few hundred dollars to be safe.

Thanks Vizcard. More than the money it is the pain of getting special skills letters since all of her supervisors have quit and are not being too responsive about writing this letter.

Was a typo indeed, PD is Nov 2009.

[harapatta2012]

I have attempted some prediction numbers for EB2I in light of June 28th AILA report and other people comments. Looks very disappointing overall. I hope it gets better in FY 2013 in terms of more spillover and less upgarde.

EB2I predictions for 2 yrs, FY 2013, 2014

Required # of Visa numbers::
aug 2007 - dec 2007 ---- 4k + 1.5k upgrade = 5.5k
jan 2008- mar 2008 --- 4.5 (1.5*3)k + 2k upgrade = 6.5k


Hopeful scenario
If average eb2I spillover in 2013 =8k ;;;8k + 3k = 11k
so priority date in Sep 2013 :--->march2008

apr2008-sep 2008 ---- 7(1.2*6)k + 4k upgrade = 11k

so priority date in Sep 2014:--->sep2008


Pessimistic Scenario--

If average eb2I spillover in 2013 = 3k ;;;3k + 3k = 6k
so priority date in sep 2013 ---> oct 2007

Nov 2007 - May 2008---- 7(1.2*6)k + 4k upgrade = 11k

so priority date in sep 2014:--->May 2008

[usernameisnotvalid]

Predictions on murthy.com

http://www.murthy.com/2012/07/06/cutoff-date-expectations-and-explanations-eb2-retrogression/

[abcx13]

Predictions on murthy.com

http://www.murthy.com/2012/07/06/cutoff-date-expectations-and-explanations-eb2-retrogression/
What's interesting is that for the first time, I'm seeing actual porting numbers (assuming these are accurate):



The DOS estimates that EB3 to EB2 filings by those hoping to upgrade their cases will account for usage of 10-15,000 visa numbers annually. Most of these are in the worldwide category. In FY12, India used 2,800 EB2 numbers via upgrade cases, and China utilized 500 visa numbers in this manner. The USCIS previously characterized the number of such cases as insignificant.

So WW porting demand is a lot higher than IC porting, which is lower than I expected. About a quarter to a third of the quota is being consumed by porting! Those are 10-15k numbers that non-porting EB2-IC could be receiving every year. So even with high demand from EB2-IC, EB2IC could have been current were it not for porting. They need to stop letting porters use their old PDs.

I wonder if USCIS policy with respect to porting and retaining PD would have been different if they'd realized just how many cases of porting there were.

[veni001]

What's interesting is that for the first time, I'm seeing actual porting numbers (assuming these are accurate):

So WW porting demand is a lot higher than IC porting, which is lower than I expected. About a quarter to a third of the quota is being consumed by porting! Those are 10-15k numbers that non-porting EB2-IC could be receiving every year. So even with high demand from EB2-IC, EB2IC could have been current were it not for porting. They need to stop letting porters use their old PDs.

I wonder if USCIS policy with respect to porting and retaining PD would have been different if they'd realized just how many cases of porting there were.


The DOS estimates that EB3 to EB2 filings by those hoping to upgrade their cases will account for usage of 10-15,000 visa numbers annually. Most of these are in the worldwide category.


In FY12, India used 2,800 EB2 numbers via upgrade cases, and China utilized 500 visa numbers in this manner. The USCIS previously characterized the number of such cases as insignificant.

I don't think the porting number is any where close to what they have said.

If it is true we can subtract half of the PERM approvals (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?270-PERM-Breakdowns-For-PD-%28including-Monthly-Breakdown%29-for-ROW-Mexico-amp-Philippines)from ROW-M-P for FY2011 and first half of FY2012 towards porting.

This could also mean porting is at it's peak and very low ROW EB2/EB3 demand for future based on USCIS-I-485 inventory: May 2012 (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/I-485%20Employment-Based%20Inventory%20Statistics/Employment-based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory%20as%20of%2005-03-12.pdf) and recent demand data for EB3ROW (http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf).

[abcx13]

I don't think the porting number is any where close to what they have said.

If it is true we can subtract half of the PERM approvals (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?270-PERM-Breakdowns-For-PD-%28including-Monthly-Breakdown%29-for-ROW-Mexico-amp-Philippines)from ROW-M-P for FY2011 and first half of FY2012 towards porting.

This could also mean porting is at it's peak and very low ROW EB2/EB3 demand for future based on USCIS-I-485 inventory: May 2012 (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/I-485%20Employment-Based%20Inventory%20Statistics/Employment-based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory%20as%20of%2005-03-12.pdf) and recent demand data for EB3ROW (http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf).

So you think it's lower than what they've said for EB2ROW and higher for EB2IC? Sorry for being dense, but I'm having a hard time understanding. The high EB2 ROW porting number makes sense in light of how slowly even EB3 ROW moves.

[veni001]

So you think it's lower than what they've said for EB2ROW and higher for EB2IC? Sorry for being dense, but I'm having a hard time understanding. The high EB2 ROW porting number makes sense in light of how slowly even EB3 ROW moves.

abcx13,
Your statement contradicts the fact that if ROW(EB3-->EB2) porting is high then EB3 ROW should move much faster.

[abcx13]

abcx13,
Your statement contradicts the fact that if ROW(EB3-->EB2) porting is high then EB3 ROW should move much faster.

Um, no it doesn't. The porting could be from EB3ROW people two years after the EB3ROW COD. That will not make the movement any faster. Also, it's hard to know how much slower EB3ROW would have moved without porting. So I still don't understand what you are saying.

[Spectator]

What's interesting is that for the first time, I'm seeing actual porting numbers (assuming these are accurate):



So WW porting demand is a lot higher than IC porting, which is lower than I expected. About a quarter to a third of the quota is being consumed by porting! Those are 10-15k numbers that non-porting EB2-IC could be receiving every year. So even with high demand from EB2-IC, EB2IC could have been current were it not for porting. They need to stop letting porters use their old PDs.

I wonder if USCIS policy with respect to porting and retaining PD would have been different if they'd realized just how many cases of porting there were.I think that is a misinterpretation by Murthy.

What the AILA statement (which is what Murthy are discussing) is different. You can find the AILA release in post #7549 (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?148-EB2-Predictions-%28Rather-Calculations%29-2012&p=28223#post28223) on page 302.


Mr. Oppenheim's office believes that there are 10,000 to 15,000 numbers used for upgrades every fiscal year.

In March 2012, alone, 3,200 numbers were used to approve China and India adjustments that were EB-3-EB-2 upgrades. The actual break down was 2,800 from India and 500 from China.

According to CO, Porting used 2.8k in March 2012 alone, not in FY2012 as the Murthy article says.

When talking about Worldwide usage, the statement was also about March 2012 consumption and said


In March 2012, alone, over 1,000 numbers were used for applications from the worldwide quota that had priority dates before 2010, so these were likely upgrades as well.

Even if the figures are taken at face value, Worldwide porting numbers were about one third of those for India and Chinese porting was about one sixth of the Indian level. March 2012 may not have been an indicative month and CO's figures are at best a "guesstimate", since he acknowledges that nobody is keeping track of the actual numbers.


Upgrades continue to be a big "wildcard," as no one knows how many are being used per year and no one is tracking it.

[veni001]

Um, no it doesn't. The porting could be from EB3ROW people two years after the EB3ROW COD. That will not make the movement any faster. Also, it's hard to know how much slower EB3ROW would have moved without porting. So I still don't understand what you are saying.

abcx13,
If that is true then it is good news for EB3ROW, since most of those PERM we are counting as EB3 for FY2009-10 should have been ported by now! Once EB3ROW cross July-2007, should move at a faster pace!

In-addition PERM data shows fewer ROW PERM certifications (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?270-PERM-Breakdowns-For-PD-%28including-Monthly-Breakdown%29-for-ROW-Mexico-amp-Philippines) for FY2011-12 (to-date).

Bottom line, once this porting peak is passed for ROW, EB2IC should be receiving more spillover.

[abcx13]

I think that is a misinterpretation by Murthy.

What the AILA statement (which is what Murthy are discussing) is different. You can find the AILA release in post #7549 (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?148-EB2-Predictions-%28Rather-Calculations%29-2012&p=28223#post28223) on page 302.



According to CO, Porting used 2.8k in March 2012 alone, not in FY2012 as the Murthy article says.

When talking about Worldwide usage, the statement was also about March 2012 consumption and said



Even if the figures are taken at face value, Worldwide porting numbers were about one third of those for India and Chinese porting was about one sixth of the Indian level. March 2012 may not have been an indicative month and CO's figures are at best a "guesstimate", since he acknowledges that nobody is keeping track of the actual numbers.

Got it. Thanks for straightening me out. :)

If those March numbers are true, then I suspect at least 50% of EB2 is being used for porters.

[qesehmk]

I agree. I think the numbers could be ONLY as high as 6K across board max.

The reason being, EB3ROW although painful, doesn't have as high wait time as EB3IC. So they can have max porting levels only as high as EB3IC (in terms of proportion).

EB3ROW probably has same or similar demand as EB3IC. So the max EB3ROW can port is about 3K ie. EB3IC level.

The statement about March that talked about 1K, could include each and every EB2&3 approval except a few EB2ROW. So 1K in its entirely doesn't represent porting. And hence can't be extrapolated to full year.


Even if the figures are taken at face value, Worldwide porting numbers were about one third of those for India and Chinese porting was about one sixth of the Indian level.

[redsox2009]

I think there will me more 2008 and 2009 applications showing on demand data tomorrow.

[vizcard]

I think there will me more 2008 and 2009 applications showing on demand data tomorrow.

Of course that will happen... Unless the USCIS has been sitting on its collective hands

[veni001]

I agree. I think the numbers could be ONLY as high as 6K across board max.

The reason being, EB3ROW although painful, doesn't have as high wait time as EB3IC. So they can have max porting levels only as high as EB3IC (in terms of proportion).

EB3ROW probably has same or similar demand as EB3IC. So the max EB3ROW can port is about 3K ie. EB3IC level.

The statement about March that talked about 1K, could include each and every EB2&3 approval except a few EB2ROW. So 1K in its entirely doesn't represent porting. And hence can't be extrapolated to full year.

Q,
That is the number we all agreed more or less over the past year.

[Spectator]

An interesting, if worrisome, post on Trackitt (http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/1039542475/eb1a-i485-any-approvals-please-update/page/last_page). The poster has an EB1A application.


Posted by gn203 (24) 41 minutes ago
Hi all,

My I140 got approved in Dec 2011 and filed I485 in Jan 2012 for me and my wife. I485 RD is 01/27/2012. We both got EAD/AP combo cards in March 2012. Couple of weeks back our I485 cases changed from IR to acceptance. Called USCIS and raised a SR. I got letter from USCIS saying that VISA availability in this category is used up. Please let me know if anyone in this date range got GC or RFE or approval of I485.

thanks

While I don't put too much store by it, it is the first post I have seen that hints of EB1 retrogression of any form is actually already effective.

The poster is Indian and, if true, it hints at a Cut Off date for at least EB1-India (and therefore probably EB1-China). In fact it would say that the date is already internally retrogressed. The PD is not readily apparent but is no later than December 2011, since that is when the I-140 appears to have been approved.

That in turn means EB2-WW would have to become Unavailable and that CO is 100% confident that other EB1 cases will fully use any remaining visas for the year.

Without further confirmation, I am not quite at the stage to fully believe that (although it is a definite possibility as I have discussed in my page 1 post (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?148-EB2-Predictions-%28Rather-Calculations%29-2012&p=7652#post7652)).

I had thought that such an event would probably only happen in September, if at all.

I've only posted it because I thought it was an interesting development.

[Kanmani]

August 2012 Demand Data is out http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf

[veni001]

August 2012 Demand Data is out http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf

Kanmani,
Thank you, about 5K change in demand for EB2IC and about 4K for EB3.

[redsox2009]

Based on the deman data is it is safe to say EB2ROW demand is no greater than 500 per month, including upgrades.......

[imdeng]

Numbers do not seem horrible if we could get the "normal" amount of SOFAD in coming years - but that seems increasingly unlikely.

Kanmani,
Thank you, about 5K change in demand for EB2IC and about 4K for EB3.

[Spectator]

August 2012 Demand Data is out http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdfThanks Kanmani,

The EB2-WW number of 775 only represents 8 days of retrogression. Consular requests with a COD of 01JAN09 should be near zero.

This equates to about 3k per month, or 9k for the the final quarter when EB2-WW is retrogressed. Not good.

[bieber]

2007 PD
EB2 India pending number from inventory 4904, Demand data shows 4050, pre adjudication 82.5%

2008 PD
EB2 India pending number from inventory 15136, Demand data shows 11150, pre adjudication 73.6%

2009 PD
EB2 India pending number from inventory 13429, Demand data shows 6125, pre adjudication 45.6%

2007 PD
EB2 China pending number from inventory 1046, Demand data shows 675, pre adjudication 64.5%

2008 PD
EB2 China pending number from inventory 3311, Demand data shows 2600, pre adjudication 78.5%

2009 PD
EB2 China pending number from inventory 2912, Demand data shows 1475, pre adjudication 50.6%

[redsox2009]

The EB2-WW number of 775 only represents 8 days of retrogression. Consular requests with a COD of 01JAN09 should be near zero.

This equates to about 3k per month, or 9k for the the final quarter when EB2-WW is retrogressed. Not good.

775 is not 8 days retrogression, last month demand data showed 250 number. I wouldn't consider entire 775 as numbers out of 8 days retrogresion.

[Spectator]

775 is not 8 days retrogression, last month demand data showed 250 number. I wouldn't consider entire 775 as numbers out of 8 days retrogresion.Since the dates were Current, last month's figure of 250 was solely due to advance requests from Consulates for the coming month.

At least 90% of those would have now had the interview and received the immigrant visa and the number reduced to a figure approaching zero.
With a COD of 01JAN09, there will be virtually no new requests from the Consulates this month.

Since the dates were Current in June, all documentarily complete AOS cases until June 30, 2012 were approved and never hit the Pending Demand file.

So virtually all of the numbers relate to AOS cases that have become pre-adjudicated in the 8 days since retrogression started on July 1, 2012, unless DOS applied internal retrogression before the end of June.

3k per month also represents around the number of EB2-WW cases that seem to have been approved each month recently. I don't think the number is less than around 2.7k per month.

[openaccount]

Demand data shows 9400 for PD after Jan 2009. CO in his last communication with AILA mentioned that there are about 17000 EB2 pre-adjudicated cases after Jan2009, i think that number is not correct. Even adding EB2ROW approvals between Jun19 and now, that number could not be anywhere near 17000 at that time.

[GhostWriter]

Bieber,
2009 PD EB2-I shows 6,125 in DD. So with inventory of 13,429 pre-adjudicated cases would be 45.6%.
You seemed to have subtracted 2008 and 2009 cumulative figures from 2010 to arrive at 2009 cases. Shouldn't only cumulative(Jan 2010) - cumulative(Jan 2009) give 2009 cases.
Similarly for 2009 EB2-C - 1,475 in DD and 2,912 in inventory, so pre-adjudicated cases would be 50.6%.
Agree ?


2007 PD
EB2 India pending number from inventory 4904, Demand data shows 4050, pre adjudication 82.5%

2008 PD
EB2 India pending number from inventory 15136, Demand data shows 11150, pre adjudication 73.6%

2009 PD
EB2 India pending number from inventory 13429, Demand data shows 2075, pre adjudication 15.45%
2007 PD
EB2 China pending number from inventory 1046, Demand data shows 675, pre adjudication 64.5%

2008 PD
EB2 China pending number from inventory 3311, Demand data shows 2600, pre adjudication 78.5%

2009 PD
EB2 China pending number from inventory 2912, Demand data shows 800, pre adjudication 27.47%

[Spectator]

Demand data shows 9400 for PD after Jan 2009. CO in his last communication with AILA mentioned that there are about 17000 EB2 pre-adjudicated cases after Jan2009, i think that number is not correct. Even adding EB2ROW approvals between Jun19 and now, that number could not be anywhere near 17000 at that time.What the AILA release said was:

Mr. Oppenheim's office already has 17,000 EB-2 cases for natives of India, China, and worldwide with priority dates after January 1, 2009, pre-adjudicated. There will be a lot of cases queued up for adjudication in October 2012, and it will take some time to get through them.
and later it said:

Mr. Oppenheim's office tries to use 13,500 visas per quarter for all EB cases. This office already has more than 17,000 in line for FY2013.

Because of the comma, I took the first statement to mean EB2-IC of all PD and the Jan 2009 date only referred to EB2-WW. That made sense based on the 01JAN09 Cut Off Date that was announced for EB2-WW.

The figure appeared incorrect anyway, because the July Demand Data as of June 7, 2012 already showed over 22k.

[Spectator]

Bieber,
2009 PD EB2-I shows 6,125 in DD. So with inventory of 13,429 pre-adjudicated cases would be 45.6%.
You seemed to have subtracted 2008 and 2009 cumulative figures from 2010 to arrive at 2009 cases. Shouldn't only cumulative(2010) - cumulative(2009) give 2009 cases.
Similarly for 2009 EB2-C - 1,475 in DD and 2,912 in inventory, so pre-adjudicated cases would be 50.6%.
Agree ?GhostWriter,

I agree with you.

Those are the figures I calculate as well.

[geevikram]

Does it materially change it anything for us?

[bieber]

Bieber,
2009 PD EB2-I shows 6,125 in DD. So with inventory of 13,429 pre-adjudicated cases would be 45.6%.
You seemed to have subtracted 2008 and 2009 cumulative figures from 2010 to arrive at 2009 cases. Shouldn't only cumulative(Jan 2010) - cumulative(Jan 2009) give 2009 cases.
Similarly for 2009 EB2-C - 1,475 in DD and 2,912 in inventory, so pre-adjudicated cases would be 50.6%.
Agree ?

yes, my mistake, I subtracted 2007 numbers twice
thanks for correcting

[Spectator]

yes, my mistake, I subtracted 2007 numbers twice
thanks for correctingbieber,

Thanks for taking the time to analyse the figures. It was very useful.

Perhaps you want to alter your original post to reflect the correct figures.

[GhostWriter]

Thanks Bieber and i agree with Spec. That way anyone not scrolling through all the posts will get the accurate information.

bieber,

Thanks for taking the time to analyse the figures. It was very useful.

Perhaps you want to alter your original post to reflect the correct figures.

GeeVikram, this DD (and the next two) will give an indication to people who filed earlier this year about the chances of their being pre-adjudicated. The USCIS case status page shows "Accpetance" (or "Initial Review" if you are lucky) and unless someone gets an RFE it is hard to guess what stage the case is in. This at least associates a probability to that guess !! Hopefully the pre-adjudication percentage will approach 90% for all cases till April-2010 in next 1-2 DDs and that should relieve some anxiety for people who filed.


Does it materially change it anything for us?

[bieber]

bieber,

Thanks for taking the time to analyse the figures. It was very useful.

Perhaps you want to alter your original post to reflect the correct figures.

Spec, I corrected my original post

[bieber]

Ghostwriter

It seems, all cases with 2008 PD are touched, either they are pre-adjudicated or waiting for RFE response. I don't even have new LUD

[madhuganj]

My PD is May 22' 2008 and I got RFE and I have submitted the requested documents to USCIS, now my status is 'Request for Evidence Response Review'
Can I assume my status is pre-adjudicated? In October 2012, once the visa numbers are available then can I get my GC?
or even though my status is pre-adjudicated I have to wait for my PD become current?
Please clarify me.

[Spectator]

My PD is May 22' 2008 and I got RFE and I have submitted the requested documents to USCIS, now my status is 'Request for Evidence Response Review'
Can I assume my status is pre-adjudicated? In October 2012, once the visa numbers are available then can I get my GC?
or even though my status is pre-adjudicated I have to wait for my PD become current?
Please clarify me.madhuganj,

Even if your case is pre-adjudicated (and you cannot assume anything with USCIS), it can only be approved when your PD becomes Current again. For a PD of May 22, 2008 that means a Cut Off Date of at least 01JUN08.

Sadly, there appears to be zero chance of that occurring in FY2013 under current circumstances.

[harapatta2012]

I am a bit confused about so little FINAL movement in EB2 India PD in FY 2011.
I agree about all other things already talked about in this thread about what all was unique this FY. But its been agreed that rapid movement of PD caused 22k visa number used already for EB2 India+ C in FY2011.

If look at historical data, PD movement every FY is about 11 months. Now spillover was different all yrs but still average is ok. Also, monthly EB2 filling is on average should be similar, about 1-2k/month.

Question: Why is FY 2011 different in overall PD movement? Shud'nt date move have been like this: FY 2011---04/2007 to 02/2008 ==11 months.
(I agree that some visa numbers went ahead to 2008 PD's but still, they are not that many.)
What is missing?


This is PD EB2 India movement last 5 yrs.
FY2006 --06/2002 to 04/2004 ==25 months
FY2007 -- 04/2004 to 08/2006==25 months
FY2008 -- 04/2003 to 01/2005==!! months exception
FY2009 -- 01/2005 to 05/2006==15 months
FY2010 -- 05/2006 to 04/2007==11 months
FY 2011 -- 04/2007 to 08/2007==4 months

[veni001]

I am a bit confused about so little FINAL movement in EB2 India PD in FY 2011.
I agree about all other things already talked about in this thread about what all was unique this FY. But its been agreed that rapid movement of PD caused 22k visa number used already for EB2 India+ C in FY2011.

If look at historical data, PD movement every FY is about 11 months. Now spillover was different all yrs but still average is ok. Also, monthly EB2 filling is on average should be similar, about 1-2k/month.

Question: Why is FY 2011 different in overall PD movement? Shud'nt date move have been like this: FY 2011---04/2007 to 02/2008 ==11 months.
(I agree that some visa numbers went ahead to 2008 PD's but still, they are not that many.)
What is missing?


This is PD EB2 India movement last 5 yrs.
FY2006 --06/2002 to 04/2004 ==25 months
FY2007 -- 04/2004 to 08/2006==25 months
FY2008 -- 04/2003 to 01/2005==!! months exception
FY2009 -- 01/2005 to 05/2006==15 months
FY2010 -- 05/2006 to 04/2007==11 months
FY 2011 -- 04/2007 to 08/2007==4 months

harapatta2012,

It's not simple math, there are lot of variable that change from time to time, please review wealth of information under FACTS AND DATA (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?15-FACTS-AND-DATA-%28Registration-Required-to-Read%29) section.

[goforgreen]

Question: Why is FY 2011 different in overall PD movement? Shud'nt date move have been like this: FY 2011---04/2007 to 02/2008 ==11 months.
(I agree that some visa numbers went ahead to 2008 PD's but still, they are not that many.)
What is missing?
...


2007 did not clear in 2012 because visas were given to 2008 people. Spec has said this before that if visas had not been given to 2008 people COD would have been at Jan 2008, which is 9 months movement and that is close enough to 11 months that you have mentioned.

Late 2007 people lost out both times by not getting EADs in 2007 and now not getting GCs even though the last few years had been orderly movement.

Thats the way it works, we have obsolutely no control on it.

[skpanda]

http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf

Cumulative
Demand Prior To China India All Other Countries Grand Total
January 1, 2008 675 4,050 0 4,725
January 1, 2009 3,275 15,200 25 18,500
January 1, 2010 4,750 21,325 75 26,150
January 1, 2012 4,950 22,225 775 27,950

[shreyasai2004]

what are the chances of PD movement in Aug 2012 Bullitein.

[TeddyKoochu]

Friends the demand data is probably on expected lines with preadjudicated cases increasing.
- EB2 I/C preadjudicated cases have increased to ~ 28K.
- I believe it is more significant to see the next inventory especially for 2009 and 2010 cases.
- In the last few years numbers have run out in September this year looks like the numbers for some categories besides EB2 I/C which is unavailable already will run out sooner.
- Since the available numbers are less I believe we should really not expect much in the upcoming VB.
-It will be interesting to watch EB2 ROW if it goes to Unavailable or if EB1 also has a cutoff date for India or as a whole (Spec thanks for your posting about a EB1 Trackitt user).
Good luck for the VB. I believe what happens in this VB especially with EB2 ROW and Eb1 will set the sentiment for the upcoming year.

[harapatta2012]

harapatta2012,

It's not simple math, there are lot of variable that change from time to time, please review wealth of information under FACTS AND DATA (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?15-FACTS-AND-DATA-%28Registration-Required-to-Read%29) section.


I agree it is not as simple as i try to put it. I was looking this from a very different and simple point of view. Nonetheless, I beleive that the major impact for the chnage in tredn this year was that the visa number got allocated to 2008 ppl instead of 2007 as 'goforgreen' suggetsed too. I wasnt sure if those were that many but it seems that is the only good reasoning so far. Offcourse there are 10 other variables and reasons for difference in PD moevement but those should not impact the overall PD yearly movement.
So if 2008 PD people used up 4-5 months of visa numbers, then PD should move fatser when it reaches 2008 then otherwise would have.
I was wondering if there would be some data in future to figure out this distribution of 2007/2008 visa numbers to check assumption.

[Kanmani]

August 2012 Visa Bulletin is out http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5749.html

PDF version ..... http://travel.state.gov/pdf/visabulletin/visabulletin_August2012.pdf

[vizcard]

August 2012 Visa Bulletin PDF version ..... http://travel.state.gov/pdf/visabulletin/visabulletin_August2012.pdf

Good news is that there is no further retrogression for EB2 ROW or CODs for EB1.

[suninphx]

August 2012 Visa Bulletin is out http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5749.html

PDF version ..... http://travel.state.gov/pdf/visabulletin/visabulletin_August2012.pdf

Thanks Kanmani ....good to see EB1 current for another month...phew!!

[murali83]

Thanks Kanmani ....good to see EB1 current for another month...phew!!

Just to strike an optimistic note, eb1 might even give eb2 row a few visas next month and we may see eb2 row cod move a little before the year end.

[chengisk]

Just to strike an optimistic note, eb1 might even give eb2 row a few visas next month and we may see eb2 row cod move a little before the year end.

I am not so sure of that, especially after Spec posted this <http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?148-EB2-Predictions-(Rather-Calculations)-2012&p=28398#post28398> yesterday.

[suninphx]

Just to strike an optimistic note, eb1 might even give eb2 row a few visas next month and we may see eb2 row cod move a little before the year end.

We need that...specially with 'not so positive' news around :)

[PD2011]

Gurus,

I have been a silent follower of this thread. Your analysis of this EB chaos is truly incredible. Now I am facing a situation of my own.

My 6 year H1-B will expire in middle of this October. My 140 for the EB2 category was approved last year. So I am going to extend my H1-B for another 3 years based on my approved 140. I have a lawyer who had successfully handled my PERM and 140 applications. However, her fee for H1-B extension is $1500!

So my question is: does anybody here have experience of filing H1-B extension by yourself with approved 140? What extra documents it requires compared to the regular H1-B extension? What are the chances of it being denied? My plan is to file the petition myself without a lawyer and save the money. Fortunately my company is very supportive and I can everything in hand.

Thank you in advance for your responses. You can delete my post after it is answered.

[gc0907]

It is entirely your company's job to do your H1 and not yours.


Gurus,

I have been a silent follower of this thread. Your analysis of this EB chaos is truly incredible. Now I am facing a situation of my own.

My 6 year H1-B will expire in middle of this October. My 140 for the EB2 category was approved last year. So I am going to extend my H1-B for another 3 years based on my approved 140. I have a lawyer who had successfully handled my PERM and 140 applications. However, her fee for H1-B extension is $1500!

So my question is: does anybody here have experience of filing H1-B extension by yourself with approved 140? What extra documents it requires compared to the regular H1-B extension? What are the chances of it being denied? My plan is to file the petition myself without a lawyer and save the money. Fortunately my company is very supportive and I can everything in hand.

Thank you in advance for your responses. You can delete my post after it is answered.

[PD2011]

I work for a small company. They have limited knowledge about immigration. I basically have do everything myself, preparing documents, finding a lawyer, paying all the fees, etc...But at least my company is supportive (e.g., signing the papers I prepared...)

[ChampU]

I have been passing on career growth opportunities, in search of the GC and had made up my mind regarding sticking to my job until I get my GC (For those who understand Marathi: Bemtya, naukri hi lagnachya baikosarkhi aste....). Now that the prospect of getting a GC this year is getting very very dull, I am seriously thinking about using AC21 and take up a job that would give me atleast a 20% pay hike. I had questions about the risks associated with AC21.. 1. Must the new job have the same title as the previous one? 2. Do the job requirements have to match exactly with the ones on my PERM application? My company had given me an employment verification letter, highlighting my job responsibilities..If my new job description includes these tasks along with some senior level stuff, is that enough?? I am not sure, if this has been addressed before..

[suninphx]

I have been passing on career growth opportunities, in search of the GC and had made up my mind regarding sticking to my job until I get my GC (For those who understand Marathi: Bemtya, naukri hi lagnachya baikosarkhi aste....). Now that the prospect of getting a GC this year is getting very very dull, I am seriously thinking about using AC21 and take up a job that would give me atleast a 20% pay hike. I had questions about the risks associated with AC21.. 1. Must the new job have the same title as the previous one? 2. Do the job requirements have to match exactly with the ones on my PERM application? My company had given me an employment verification letter, highlighting my job responsibilities..If my new job description includes these tasks along with some senior level stuff, is that enough?? I am not sure, if this has been addressed before..

Bemtya, naukri hi lagnachya baikosarkhi aste....). -- LOL

I also have similar questions..... I had posted that here http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?238-Post-485-Filing&p=28361#post28361

As far as designation goes I remember Q responding that designation can be different (like Director Software Development) ..

[ChampU]

I have discussed this with my 2007 batch friends and their overwhelming response was go for it..Their logic and rationale makes sense, but my reservations against going for it are:

1. Majority of folks who filed in 2007 knew very well that they are looking at a 2-3 yr wait before getting GC, at least.. It makes total sense to use the benefits of AC21, instead of being stuck on H1.. For folks like me with PD in first half of 2008, the estimated wait is a huge unknown.. Anywhere between Q1-2013 to ... and with EB2-ROW (anbd possibly EB1)getting a COD, its not a very pleasant picture.
2. The amount of scrutiny in immigration matters has gone up tremendously. Getting h1, L1 stamped is getting difficult by the day. Who knows, even AC21 transfers might be under the microscope as well and any small technicality (Job description change, location issue, prevailing wage.. there are a million things that they might decide to pull ur file on) might derail the whole process..

It hurts to choke your own career and drain your own wallet..

[Eb2_Dec07]

Gurus,

Is there any chance I will get 485 approved in 2013 - 3rd quarter .

My primary spouse already received GC in March and I as a dep missed out .

Thanks

[mrdeeds]

I have been passing on career growth opportunities, in search of the GC and had made up my mind regarding sticking to my job until I get my GC (For those who understand Marathi: Bemtya, naukri hi lagnachya baikosarkhi aste....). Now that the prospect of getting a GC this year is getting very very dull, I am seriously thinking about using AC21 and take up a job that would give me atleast a 20% pay hike. I had questions about the risks associated with AC21.. 1. Must the new job have the same title as the previous one? 2. Do the job requirements have to match exactly with the ones on my PERM application? My company had given me an employment verification letter, highlighting my job responsibilities..If my new job description includes these tasks along with some senior level stuff, is that enough?? I am not sure, if this has been addressed before..

Since you've waited thus far, might make sense to stick around a couple of months more to see how HR3012 plays out before the election. I know this wasn't the question but..

[isantem]

I work for a small company. They have limited knowledge about immigration. I basically have do everything myself, preparing documents, finding a lawyer, paying all the fees, etc...But at least my company is supportive (e.g., signing the papers I prepared...)

OMG! By LAW the petitioner (Company) need to pay the fees (except lawyer fees).

[vizcard]

OMG! By LAW the petitioner (Company) need to pay the fees (except lawyer fees).

this is true. the employer must pay the application fees. I'm not positive but they even have to pay visa stamping fees (at least mine does).

[openaccount]

I still think there is a fair chance of EB1 getting COD or become 'U' in Sept VB . There might be numbers available for August but that doesn't mean that t is going to stay 'C' in next VB. If demand increases than what is estimated for August it will become 'U' in Sept VB. If USCIS gives more demand estimation for Sept then there will be COD in Sept VB.

Demand for EB2ROW prior to Jan 2009 is 25 (almost 0) this might be the reason for EB2ROW PD staying at Jan2009 instead of becoming 'U'.

If EB1 gets COD or 'U' then EB2ROW also will be 'U'.

[veni001]

Gurus,

Is there any chance I will get 485 approved in 2013 - 3rd quarter .

My primary spouse already received GC in March and I as a dep missed out .

Thanks

Eb2_Dec07,
I would say the chances are high but it depends greatly on EB1/EB2ROW demand at the start of FY2013.

[PD2011]

They would pay first but later deduct from the salary...


OMG! By LAW the petitioner (Company) need to pay the fees (except lawyer fees).

[Spectator]

They would pay first but later deduct from the salary...That is also illegal.

[PD2011]

Not only black and white in the world...Can anybody provide some answers to my orignal question? Much appreciated.


That is also illegal.

[kd2008]

Not only black and white in the world...Can anybody provide some answers to my orignal question? Much appreciated.

PD2011, nobody here would wish your fate on anyone else here. Spec and others have clearly indicated that what has been going on is not proper and may be illegal. It is best for you to seek advice from a competent attorney.

I hope you get the right advice soon.

[vizcard]

Spec -
I just read through your header post in detail. It definitely paints a grim picture. The key factor is obviously the demand at the end of Sept going in to FY2013. Its even more critical for HR3012 to pass through so that a healthy SOFAD can come through to EB2IC.

I do have a question though. Demand data shows 4725 cases in 2007. How many addln cases do you think can come in for 2007 ? I assume there will be some porting and possibly some more pre-adjudications.

I personally believe we will clear 2007 in FY2013 easily and should end up around Jan 1, 2008 come Oct 2013 (unless HR3012 becomes law).

PS: I don't want this to become a HR3012 discussion.

[PD2011]

Thank you. Please delete all the related posts.



PD2011, nobody here would wish your fate on anyone else here. Spec and others have clearly indicated that what has been going on is not proper and may be illegal. It is best for you to seek advice from a competent attorney.

I hope you get the right advice soon.

[Spectator]

Spec -
I just read through your header post in detail. It definitely paints a grim picture. The key factor is obviously the demand at the end of Sept going in to FY2013. Its even more critical for HR3012 to pass through so that a healthy SOFAD can come through to EB2IC.

I do have a question though. Demand data shows 4725 cases in 2007. How many addln cases do you think can come in for 2007 ? I assume there will be some porting and possibly some more pre-adjudications.

I personally believe we will clear 2007 in FY2013 easily and should end up around Jan 1, 2008 come Oct 2013 (unless HR3012 becomes law).

PS: I don't want this to become a HR3012 discussion.vizcard,

Thanks for your post.

I was actually just going to ask Veni why he was so upbeat about FY2013, since he seems to share your opinion.

I think we need to think about the 4,050 EB2-I Demand Data cases separately, since EB2-C is a completely different situation.

For me the headwinds consist of EB2-WW cases delayed from FY2012 and Porting cases delayed from FY2012 and becoming ready to adjudicate in FY2013 itself.

While the Demand Data shows a lower figure (which may be more indicative), the USCIS Inventory shows 6.1k EB2-I cases to clear 2007. Ultimately it will probably be somewhere in between. Let's say that it requires 2.2k spillover to reach 5k.

Porting

As Kanmani found, the final interfiling step cannot be completed until the PD becomes Current again, so there are a number of porting cases between May 2012 and October 2012 to add. At 3k porting /year that is a further 1.5k cases, bringing total cases to 6.5k and spillover required to 3.7k.

If we then account for porting cases in the first 2 quarters of FY2013, that adds a further 1.5k, so total visas required to clear 2007 becomes 8k and spillover required becomes 5.2k. The remaining 2 quarters of FY2013 add another 1.5k porting cases, so the final tally for EB2-I to clear 2007 becomes 9.5k approvals of which 6.7k is spillover. Note I have used the lower bound of porting estimates.

In traditional terms, that is 12.3k SOFAD for EB2-IC

EB2-Worldwide

Any EB2-WW pent up demand going into FY2013 will have priority for any spillover available. I think that will be in the 6-8k range. Unless the backlog is increased, EB2-WW are likely to hit or exceed the 34.4k allocation available to them. That means no Fall Across within EB2 and potentially using some of the Fall Down from EB1. In many ways, I had expected EB2-WW consumption to start to reduce based on PERM, but that does not seem to be the case to date.

How much Fall Down might we get in FY2013?

It is possible that EB5 will approach the 10k available to them in FY2013, judging by the I-526 statistics.

EB4 is a complete dark horse. It gave loads of visas in FY2011, but that was an unusual event. I have never seen information about EB4 consumption outside the yearly DOS and DHS reports. Maybe I am being too pessimistic about future performance.

If EB4 doesn't contribute, then the only Fall Down might be from EB1 itself. Unless EB1 I-140 numbers have dropped dramatically, EB1 is likely to l use 34-36k visas, giving only 4-6k Fall Down. Some of this might even be used by EB2-WW.

That doesn't appear to be sufficient spillover to clear PDs of 2007, unless EB4 makes a contribution.

In the absolute worst case, EB2-I might only have 2.8k visas available in FY2013, which wouldn't even sustain a Cut Off Date in August 2007 once porting is factored in.

Admittedly, I am painting the grimmest possible scenario, but I think it is one we should at least think about.

Even at best, SOFAD is not going to be very high next year IMO. If pressed, I think 8k visas to EB2-I is a maximum. EB2-C will only get 2.8k regardless, but that is enough to move them into 2008 because of their lower number of applications.

Please feel free to rip it apart. I realise I have used fairly aggressive assumptions, but I don't feel comfortable with less at the moment.

Being the lone pessimistic voice doesn't feel good. I don't derive any pleasure from it at all and frankly I am loathe to post predictions because of that.

I'd really like to think I have missed something obvious, but I just can't see it. I appreciate all opinions.

[openaccount]

Being the lone pessimistic voice doesn't feel good. I don't derive any pleasure from it at all and frankly I am loathe to post predictions because of that.

Spec -
your predictions are not pessimistic they are realistic. It is is better to live in reality rather than in assumption.

Had dates progressed in controlled manner EB2IC could have got no more than 16-18K SOFAD instead of 24k SOFAD this could have taken EB2IC FY2012 PD to Oct/Nov 2007 which matches with your earlier prediction for FY2012.

Please continue what you are doing which will give us a better picture.