EB2 Predictions (Rather Calculations) - 2011

[nuvikas]

I second that. It would really be helpful.

Q,Teddy and other expert number crunchers,

Can we have an optimistic, pessimistic and most likely dates for EB2I/C in Jul-Sep 2011 based on the latest facts?

[bieber]

Q, T, S great discussion

I think Eb1-C is one category that can be traced on Trackitt very well, and there is evidence for decline. 25% decline as suggested by Teddy and Spec appears to be reasonable, I'm no where near to u guys in understanding all the details and I know I tend to believe more SOFAD logic whatever it is :)

Teddy, if you don't consider the 25% decline and assume cancelling EB1 spill, how ur low end estimate of 27k will change?

quizzer and nuvikas, 15k-35k is Q's broad range and 22-26k as possible, Jan inventory shows the backlog 34.5k,

[TeddyKoochu]

Q, T, S great discussion

I think Eb1-C is one category that can be traced on Trackitt very well, and there is evidence for decline. 25% decline as suggested by Teddy and Spec appears to be reasonable, I'm no where near to u guys in understanding all the details and I know I tend to believe more SOFAD logic whatever it is :)

Teddy, if you don't consider the 25% decline and assume cancelling EB1 spill, how ur low end estimate of 27k will change?

quizzer and nuvikas, 15k-35k is Q's broad range and 22-26k as possible, Jan inventory shows the backlog 34.5k,

25% Decline in EB1 means 25/100 * 40K = 10K extra SOFAD. I had actually used the 25% decline and this gives us ~ 35K SOFAD which will put the date at ~ 01-MAY-2007, the news of the perm acceleration came after that.

[TeddyKoochu]

I second that. It would really be helpful.

Q,Teddy and other expert number crunchers,

Can we have an optimistic, pessimistic and most likely dates for EB2I/C in Jul-Sep 2011 based on the latest facts?



Friends I would believe that the conservative SOFAD will be ~ 28K and the date will be in Jan 2007. However many other folks have much lower estimates.

[qesehmk]

Sure. I can do my own and post in header.

Teddy , Spec I think may be I can create a section in the header where I can describe yours too. Just let me know what I can put in there in your name.

Or if you can edit the first post then by all means please do so.


Q,Teddy and other expert number crunchers,

Can we have an optimistic, pessimistic and most likely dates for EB2I/C in Jul-Sep 2011 based on the latest facts?


I second that. It would really be helpful.

[TeddyKoochu]

Q I have an idea lemme know if its feasible. Maybe at the end of your projections you can have a placeholder / table which says projects by
Handle Post Nbr
Teddy XX
Spec YY

This way all will be represented including myself and Spec because there are several contributors to name a few veni, kd2008, bieber. The Post # is unique and each one of us can keep editing that or if we like to create a new post the we let you know the new post #. This way you will have the first post and all of us will have our unique reference. Maybe on the table on post # 1 we should also have a column which says expected date in Sep 2011 we should stick to 1 likely date rather than a range as that is what most people like to know / hear. I will cleanup my projections by the weekend as by that time we will have concrete data for 4 months.

[bieber]

Friends I would believe that the conservative SOFAD will be ~ 28K and the date will be in Jan 2007. However many other folks have much lower estimates.

Teddy, if you have 28K the date should be in Mar/Apr 2007.

20130 to clear 2006
22324 to clear 2007 Jan
24383 to clear 2007 Feb
26469 to clear 2007 Mar
28498 to clear 2007 Apr
30087 to clear 2007 May
31917 to clear 2007 June
35378 to clear 2007 July

[bieber]

25% Decline in EB1 means 25/100 * 40K = 10K extra SOFAD. I had actually used the 25% decline and this gives us ~ 35K SOFAD which will put the date at ~ 01-MAY-2007, the news of the perm acceleration came after that.
Q, thx for explaining that again

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy, if you have 28K the date should be in Mar/Apr 2007.

20130 to clear 2006
22324 to clear 2007 Jan
24383 to clear 2007 Feb
26469 to clear 2007 Mar
28498 to clear 2007 Apr
30087 to clear 2007 May
31917 to clear 2007 June
35378 to clear 2007 July

Bieber I use the following table now. The offset factor includes PD porting as 6k-1.5K (As 1.5K porting should be in the inventory) also 1/4th of I/C cap is consumed. 28K will help us to barely clear 2010 and with say 15 days buffer we will be in Jan 2007. Offset also includes older cases that are current.

Month-Year India China PWMB CP "Total
Monthly" "Cumlative
Sum
"
Offset 8000 1000 0 0 9000 9000
May-06 1110 38 100 100 1348 10348
Jun-06 1696 541 100 100 2437 12785
Jul-06 1505 620 100 100 2325 15110
Aug-06 1677 693 100 100 2570 17680
Sep-06 1745 773 100 100 2718 20398
Oct-06 1747 732 100 100 2679 23077
Nov-06 1737 667 100 100 2604 25681
Dec-06 1881 770 200 100 2951 28632
Jan-07 1540 654 200 100 2494 31126
Feb-07 1444 615 200 100 2359 33485
Mar-07 1404 682 200 100 2386 35871
Apr-07 1420 609 200 100 2329 38200
May-07 1070 519 500 100 2189 40389
Jun-07 1272 558 1000 100 2930 43319
Jul-07 1673 1788 2000 100 5561 48880

[bieber]

Teddy

that was very detailed, thanks for posting the table

[parsvnath]

Q, Spec and Teddy,

I think we are underestimating the mag of EB3 to EB2 porting (6000). My company (which I am not stating due to privacy reasons with about 2000 people) recently had a policy change to allow EB3 to EB2 porting due to retention issues. About 50 people from my company (who are EB3) are now eligible to convert into EB2 and they have initiated the labor cert for those people. I think EB3 to EB2 conversion should be atleast 20000 people. I arrived the figure of 20000 based on companies similar to mine and having an extrapolation factor. I am in ATL and already know 3 consulting companies who are converting people due to retention issues.

Thanks!

[qesehmk]

Teddy

Terrific idea. I love it. Lets do it. One and all send me your predictions in following format.

Handle, EB1 SOFAD, EB2 ROW SOFAD, EB5 SOFAD, Total SOFAD, Low End of SOFAD, High End of SOFAD, OPTIONAL BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF YOUR PREDICTION.

I will start including it in teh header of teh thread. And tehn if you want to change it .... just let me know.



Q I have an idea lemme know if its feasible. Maybe at the end of your projections you can have a placeholder / table which says projects by
Handle Post Nbr
Teddy XX
Spec YY

This way all will be represented including myself and Spec because there are several contributors to name a few veni, kd2008, bieber. The Post # is unique and each one of us can keep editing that or if we like to create a new post the we let you know the new post #. This way you will have the first post and all of us will have our unique reference. Maybe on the table on post # 1 we should also have a column which says expected date in Sep 2011 we should stick to 1 likely date rather than a range as that is what most people like to know / hear. I will cleanup my projections by the weekend as by that time we will have concrete data for 4 months.


Q, Spec and Teddy,

I think we are underestimating the mag of EB3 to EB2 porting (6000). My company (which I am not stating due to privacy reasons with about 2000 people) recently had a policy change to allow EB3 to EB2 porting due to retention issues. About 50 people from my company (who are EB3) are now eligible to convert into EB2 and they have initiated the labor cert for those people. I think EB3 to EB2 conversion should be atleast 20000 people. I arrived the figure of 20000 based on companies similar to mine and having an extrapolation factor. I am in ATL and already know 3 consulting companies who are converting people due to retention issues.

Thanks!

PN, Thanks. Very useful information. I wouldn't blame EB3 folks for doing so.

[pch053]

My feeling is that if many of the EB3 -> EB2 porting are in the stage of initiating the PERM Labor certification, then the # of EB3->EB2 porting cases will affect the movement of EB2 more in the coming years (i.e. 2012 and onwards). This is also a very basic question I am clarifying: if a EB3 person has got his/her I140 approved, then the person will be counted in the pending cases under EB2 category, right? Does the pending EB numbers from Jan'11 provide any information on how many cases have been ported from EB3 -> EB2 between Oct'10 and Jan'11, i.e. if we compare the pending EB2/EB3 inventory during this time.

Thanks!

[Spectator]

My feeling is that if many of the EB3 -> EB2 porting are in the stage of initiating the PERM Labor certification, then the # of EB3->EB2 porting cases will affect the movement of EB2 more in the coming years (i.e. 2012 and onwards). This is also a very basic question I am clarifying: if a EB3 person has got his/her I140 approved, then the person will be counted in the pending cases under EB2 category, right? Does the pending EB numbers from Jan'11 provide any information on how many cases have been ported from EB3 -> EB2 between Oct'10 and Jan'11, i.e. if we compare the pending EB2/EB3 inventory during this time.

Thanks!pch053,

You ask good questions.

I can only give my personal opinion about this.

For Porting, as far as USCIS is aware, there is only a new I-140, which is obviously not part of the Inventory.

The I-485, which is, is already on the Inventory under EB3. That will only get changed at the point that the new I-140 is linked to the existing I-485 and the case is approved. In this case, the I-485 is never shown as part of the EB2 USCIS Inventory.

There is different argument as to whether USCIS are properly removing the Porting case from the EB3 Inventory figures.

Certainly, there was no evidence of Porting cases within the EB2 USCIS Inventory last year.

I think it is now impossible to analyze the Inventory in this way, even if they were added. Since the Inventory now includes pre-adjudicated cases from Local Offices, it would be impossible to tell whether the addition was due to a Porting or LO case.

Anyway, as I said, I don't think the Porting case will ever show up on the EB2 Inventory numbers.

I hope that makes sense.

[veni001]

Q, Spec and Teddy,

I think we are underestimating the mag of EB3 to EB2 porting (6000). My company (which I am not stating due to privacy reasons with about 2000 people) recently had a policy change to allow EB3 to EB2 porting due to retention issues. About 50 people from my company (who are EB3) are now eligible to convert into EB2 and they have initiated the labor cert for those people. I think EB3 to EB2 conversion should be atleast 20000 people. I arrived the figure of 20000 based on companies similar to mine and having an extrapolation factor. I am in ATL and already know 3 consulting companies who are converting people due to retention issues.

Thanks!

This number is very high, and also remember it's not a cake walk to get PERM and i140 approval for EB2, especially in the IT consulting sector!

At least i140 stage USCIS is very stringent on Job necessity and Ability to Pay, i would stick with Teddy's estimate, unless we see big surge in i140 receipts/completions from USCIS dashboard in the next 3-4 months.

As a side note, if i140 trending remain constant for FY 2011 and assume more EB3-->EB2 conversion means, less EB1/EB2 ROW applications!

[veni001]

pch053,

You ask good questions.
................
Certainly, there was no evidence of Porting cases within the EB2 USCIS Inventory last year.
................

I hope that makes sense.

Spec,
I think this number is about 4K for India

12-11-2009 Inventory EB2I - 40,022
10-01-2010 Inventory EB2I - 24,254
-------------------------------------
Net Reduction - 15,678
=============================
Total EB2I approvals for FY 2010 - 19,961
Difference - 4,193
------------------------------------

[qesehmk]

Veni

That's a good way to figure it out. Agree. What's interesting is .... then EB3I needs to be reduced by 4K plus its own quota 3K. Did EB3I reduce by that much? That will seal this as far as EB2I is concerned.



Spec,
I think this number is about 4K for India

12-11-2009 Inventory EB2I - 40,022
10-01-2010 Inventory EB2I - 24,254
-------------------------------------
Net Reduction - 15,678
=============================
Total EB2I approvals for FY 2010 - 19,961
Difference - 4,193
------------------------------------

[Spectator]

Veni,

I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say - that's my bad, not yours.

I was saying that Porting cases are not shown DIRECTLY as part of the USCIS Inventory.

As you have shown, their presence can be inferred from the actual approvals and Inventory movement.

Using a slightly modified version of your calculation, which includes allowances for some additional factors, I came to a figure of 3,379.

I've probably posted it at some point, but I can't honestly remember.

[pch053]

I also remember a similar calculation in trackitt where the EB3 -> EB2 porting was estimated around 3,000 or so for the last year (i.e. up to Sep'10). I think this year we still don't yet have solid numbers to back up any claim for EB3 -> EB2 estimation. I have seen threads in trackitt where people's estimates have varied from as low as 500 to as high as 25,000. Without any further evidence, probably a number of around 6,000 (as mentioned in one of the earlier post) might be a reasonable choice to consider.

On a related issue (mentioned in details in the earlier posts), the # of EB1 approvals in trackitt is also a lot lower this year. I remember one thread in trackitt where people had differeing opinions on the reason for this. One group of people said that there are fewer EB1 visas that are getting approved. The other line of thought was that since EB1C folks have got hammered in trackiit in several threads, they don't post their case details in trackitt. With EB1C contributing to the lions share of EB1 approval the overall EB1 numbers have dropped (on this note, I noticed the numbers to be low in EB1A and EB1B too). Some people are also of the opinion that the # of trackitt cases in EB1 category is too small a sample to make any prediction/data extrapolation. Not sure, which one is true but we probably again don't have sufficient data to validate or refute any of the claims.

[veni001]

Veni,
.......
I was saying that Porting cases are not shown DIRECTLY as part of the USCIS Inventory.
.........


Spec,
I agree with you.

[veni001]

Veni

That's a good way to figure it out. Agree. What's interesting is .... then EB3I needs to be reduced by 4K plus its own quota 3K. Did EB3I reduce by that much? That will seal this as far as EB2I is concerned.

Q,
You are absolutely correct, Inventory figures show only 4,234 EB3I reduction for the same period, this could be largely due to new 245(i) cases being added in this period?

[Spectator]

Veni

That's a good way to figure it out. Agree. What's interesting is .... then EB3I needs to be reduced by 4K plus its own quota 3K. Did EB3I reduce by that much? That will seal this as far as EB2I is concerned.Q, veni,

I did the calculation for EB3-I in the same way as I did for EB2-I.

EB3-I shows a reduction in FY2010 of 5,854 versus actual approvals of 3,036.

That gives an unexplained reduction of 2,818.

Given there are other factors in both calculations, (2,818) for EB3 versus 3,377 for EB2-I is not that dissimilar. If we average it out, we get a figure of 3,098.

I think we can say with some confidence that the Porting figure for FY2010 lies between 3k and 4k

[qesehmk]

Thanks Spec & Veni.

Makes sense. So if EB3I has 3K conversion then I would imagine ROW and EB3C will have at least 3K - which should then equal to 6K. Again .... not a pretty picture. But not too bad.

p.s. EB3C is calculatable (if there is such a word!) but EB3ROW is not because its dates are moving a bit faster and is capable of adding PWMBs. Right?


Q, veni,

I did the calculation for EB3-I in the same way as I did for EB2-I.

EB3-I shows a reduction in FY2010 of 5,693 versus actual approvals of 3,036.

That gives an unexplained reduction of 2,657.

Given there are other factors in both calculations, (2,657) for EB3 versus 3,379 for EB2-I is not that dissimilar. If we average it out, we get a figure of 3,018.

[punjabi]

Spec

I know I would frighten anybody. And let me explain why this changed so much from what we have been discussing.

But before that .... quickly speaking .... keep EB3 out of this. Since this thread is EB2 .... I didn't calculate EB3 (which involves some finetuning between other workers and rest of EB3). So EB3 numbers are not solid. However they don't impact EB2. So we are good on this forum. I will separately update EB3 thread and then update EB3 here too.

Coming back to what changed:

1) EB2 ROW
Our discussions were always around ROW-EB2. So nothing really changed there other than I calculated PURE EB2-ROW NEW demand (lets say X) as follows:
... X = 2010 Actual Approvals - Dec 09 Inv + Oct 10 Inv
This "NEW DEMAND" indicates how many new 485s were filed in that year.
For 2010 this number came in as 27336 (ROW), 1095 (Mexico), 3477 (Philipines) = 31.9K

Incidently this exactly correlates to the I-140 approved last year for ROW-MP EB2. Which means that all of those 140s were traslated to 485 being filed (which again makes sense since ROW continues to be current.

Now if we assume that in 2011 the demand will be 3/4th of this number = 24K ; then thats what my new model assumes. So no surprises there.

2) EB1
However, we had never discussed calculating EB1 demand for 2011.
Now before we do that we at least need to understand the 2010 PURE NEW demand for EB1. Using same formula as above... that comes to 45.7K.
This begs the question is there any reason why in 2010 EB1 will see unusual demand. I do not have any reason here. And so we have no option but assuming that in 2011 we will continue to see similar levels.

3) The role of Backlog

Our discussions never explicitely discussed relatively higher level of EB1 and EB2-ROW backlog at the end of Sep 2010. This is a fact that the backlog is higher in both categories compared to Dec 09 levels. So the question is even if there is SOFAD in 2011, will USCIS choose to clear this backlog or will USCIS choose to pass it on to EB2.

I as always take conservative approach in assuming that the former will happen.


So that's the rationale so far. Pls feel free to point out any errors / improvements. On this one I will be really happy to be proven wrong since like you I too have a personal stake in it !!!

Hi qesehmrk
I am following you blog 1st on immigrationvoice website since it started & now on your own blog. You have been always a nice positive ray of hope or fresh breeze of air if If I may say. Please dont lose that image by painting such a bad scenario for lots of your fans. At the max you might be wrong ...so who cares!!!!!!!!!!!!! But please don"t fall in trap of all those negative people who are stating again & again that there is no future for Eb2 since this blog started ( remember when you stated first time that Eb2would be cleared in 2-3 years without a so called dream bill ..they were all jumping on your throat)..Fact is that Eb2 has seen a movement of almost 2 years since we started to discuss it so it can't be any different this year..
best regards

[veni001]

Thanks Spec & Veni.

Makes sense. So if EB3I has 3K conversion then I would imagine ROW and EB3C will have at least 3K - which should then equal to 6K. Again .... not a pretty picture. But not too bad.

p.s. EB3C is calculatable (if there is such a word!) but EB3ROW is not because its dates are moving a bit faster and is capable of adding PWMBs. Right?

Q,Spec,
Agreed, EB2ROW/C might have 3K porting, this brings us to the point to conclude that 1/2 of the i140 completions for FY 2010 are EB1/EB2ROW:)

[qesehmk]

Punjabi,

I appreciate your kind words. I know that EB2 should've been a cakewalk. But the way all those PERMs were cleared just in time ... killed hopes. Its a travesty of justice that IC folks have to wait for so long. But then these are the rules and you have to follow them!

Regarding predictions .. I wish it could be any easier. Hopefully in next couple of months we will have better I140 data from website as well as better trackitt data to track trend.


Hi qesehmrk
I am following you blog 1st on immigrationvoice website since it started & now on your own blog. You have been always a nice positive ray of hope or fresh breeze of air if If I may say. Please dont lose that image by painting such a bad scenario for lots of your fans. At the max you might be wrong ...so who cares!!!!!!!!!!!!! But please don"t fall in trap of all those negative people who are stating again & again that there is no future for Eb2 since this blog started ( remember when you stated first time that Eb2would be cleared in 2-3 years without a so called dream bill ..they were all jumping on your throat)..Fact is that Eb2 has seen a movement of almost 2 years since we started to discuss it so it can't be any different this year..
best regards


Q,Spec,
Agreed, EB2ROW/C might have 3K porting, this brings us to the point to conclude that 1/2 of the i140 completions for FY 2010 are EB1/EB2ROW:)

Veni you lost me there. Didn't understand the correlation.

[Spectator]

Thanks Spec & Veni.

Makes sense. So if EB3I has 3K conversion then I would imagine ROW and EB3C will have at least 3K - which should then equal to 6K. Again .... not a pretty picture. But not too bad.

p.s. EB3C is calculatable (if there is such a word!) but EB3ROW is not because its dates are moving a bit faster and is capable of adding PWMBs. Right?In theory, EB2-C Porting could be calculated by the same method.

If you do this, you get a negative number, i.e the Inventory accounts for more cases than approvals, so I would have to assume zero.

The other side of the calculation with EB3-C is problematical as well. EB3-C had 56.15% CP last year and this may skew the figures considerably. It gives a figure of 1,207. Averaging it out gives 643.

Since the EB2 figure does not yield a positive figure, I suggest we ignore Porting as a significant factor for EB2-China.

As far as I am aware, you are correct in saying the same approach cannot be used for EB2-ROW. The calculation for EB3-ROW gives a positive figure i.e there were less reductions than expected, so I can only assume zero Porting.

PS When I say assume zero Porting, I mean it is not possible to derive it from the figures. I am sure there is some, but it must be at quite a low level outside of India. Therefore we might be able to ignore it as a significant factor in the calculations.

[qesehmk]

Spec

Wouldn't chinese conversion = conversion calculated using EB2I method (a) + CP actual number (can be obtained from DoS reports of 2010 actuals) (b)?

Since (a) is -ve then if you add (b) ... gives you exact conversion from EB 2->3



In theory, EB2-C Porting could be calculated by the same method.

If you do this, you get a negative number, i.e the Inventory accounts for more cases than approvals, so I would have to assume zero.

The other side of the calculation with EB3-C is problematical as well. EB3-C had 56.15% CP last year and this may skew the figures considerably. It gives a figure of 1,207. Averaging it out gives 643.

Since the EB2 figure does not yield a positive figure, I suggest we ignore Porting as a significant factor for EB2-China.

As far as I am aware, you are correct in saying the same approach cannot be used for EB2-ROW. The calculation for EB3-ROW gives a positive figure i.e there were less reductions than expected, so I can only assume zero Porting.

[veni001]

Veni you lost me there. Didn't understand the correlation.


Q,
FY 2010 total i140 completions - 73,746
Apply 15-20% denial rate then this brings approvals to about 60k -62K
FY 2010 EB1 i485 approvals - 41,026, This translates to about 18.5K i140
FY 2010 EB2ROW,M&P i485 approvals - 27,406, This translates to about 12.5K i140
Total EB1,EB2ROW,M&P I140 approvals for FY2010 = 18.5k+12.5k =31k (50% of approved i140)

[Spectator]

Spec

Wouldn't chinese conversion = conversion calculated using EB2I method (a) + CP actual number (can be obtained from DoS reports of 2010 actuals) (b)?

Since (a) is -ve then if you add (b) ... gives you exact conversion from EB 2->3Q,

I am already accounting for CP. That is one of the reasons my calculation differs from veni's. I am also accounting for the fact that there is only 9.5 months between the Inventories and adjusting the Dec09 figure back to October 2009.

In a way, the discussion only relates to the past.

It is now impossible to use the same method, because additions can come from Local Offices.

Particularly for the EB3 calculation, it will be impossible to calculate the reduction due to Porting, since it will appear lower due to an unknown number of additions from LO.

It has an effect on EB2, but not as much, since the EB2 LO cases appear to be quite low at present. Nonetheless, the presence of any additional LO cases in the EB2 Inventory will depress the number of apparent Porting cases.

[Spectator]

On the subject of Porting, I believe in the main, it is currently confined to India because of the huge disparity in Cut Off Dates between EB2 and EB3 and the time it will take for even fairly old PD in EB3-I to become Current.

I think that might change in coming years and that numbers from other Countries, particularly China and ROW will increase.

From looking at the number of LO cases that were added in the January Inventory and when they were added, I have a suspicion that the October 2010 Inventory might only represent a little over half of the total number of cases in EB3 which USCIS is really processing.

The true extent of the LO cases will only become apparent over several years, as interviews are finally conducted and the cases are added to the Inventory.

If that proves even semi-accurate, when people realize what that means to the time scales to become Current, the pressure to Port will increase substantially for all Countries.

Of course wanting to Port and being able to are two different things.

[kd2008]

For me, FY 2011 is a done deal and I do not expect much out of it for EB2 I+C.

But I have been thinking about what Teddy has said about EB2ROW demand falling sharply on Trackitt. Given the way things are right now, it will be very important piece of info come FY 2012. I know its long ways away. But the way things progress through USCIS, FY 2012 can be a blessing in many ways or a complete disaster.

As Eb2 I+C demand gets used up, it will very important see how USCIS progresses dates beyond July 2007 and how soon does it do it. Should it choose to open the flood gates in October 2011 - the first month of FY 2012, the whole year will be a blessing for using up the lack of demand from EB2ROW. If it waits till spillover season i.e. June 2012, it will be a disaster as there will not be enough EB2ROW and not enough EB2 I+C in the pipeline to be approved.

I guess we already new this but the Teddy's piece of info just highlights how important and fragile this will be. O the cursed stars of Eb2 I+C!

[shaumack]

First of all let me mention that you guys are doing a great job ova here and I really appreciate y'all putting ya time into this.

I definitly do not want to claim that I understand all ya calculations or know much about this; but when I compare Visas issued and AOS subjected to Numerical Limitation for FY 2009 and FY 2010 at DOL website, I do not see much difference in visa issued for FY 2009 and FY 2010 for EB1 category. So even if FY 2011 would yield similar demand in EB1 category and with EB2 having 3/4 demand of FY 2010 per your model, why would EB2 -IC not receive similar spillover in FY 2011? I do understand that we might not get similar 10K spillover due to unavailability of SOFAD from FB.

60

[qesehmk]

shaumack welcome to forum!

I am the most pessimist on this forum so let me answer first - so that anybody who answers next will be an improvement on me!!

The answer is - Because there is sufficient ROW in pineline that can potentially consume all ROW quota. EB1 will consume its own. & the EB5 we had last year is offset by the lack of 10K family.



First of all let me mention that you guys are doing a great job ova here and I really appreciate y'all putting ya time into this.

I definitly do not want to claim that I understand all ya calculations or know much about this; but when I compare Visas issued and AOS subjected to Numerical Limitation for FY 2009 and FY 2010 at DOL website, I do not see much difference in visa issued for FY 2009 and FY 2010 for EB1 category. So even if FY 2011 would yield similar demand in EB1 category and with EB2 having 3/4 demand of FY 2010 per your model, why would EB2 -IC not receive similar spillover in FY 2011? I do understand that we might not get similar 10K spillover due to unavailability of SOFAD from FB.

60

[veni001]

On the subject of Porting, I believe in the main, it is currently
........
I think that might change in coming years and that numbers from other Countries, particularly China and ROW will increase.
.........

Spec,
I am not expecting very much porting from China, M&P or even ROW here is my reason
EB3C only got 4K pending so they will be crossing July 2007 by Sept 2012
also total PERM approvals for China is 2k and 4K respectively in FY 2009 & FY 2010
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EB3M&P got about 15K pending between April 05 and July 07 and also total PERM approvals for M&P is 2.5k and 6.5K respectively in FY 2009 & FY 2010, historically EB2 M&P demand is less.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EB3ROW got about 40k pending between April 05 and July 07 and about 30K PERM approvals in FY 2010 out of which we can count 50% as EB2 who already got their i485 approvals in 2010! So what ever porting from EB2ROW should be part of our estimated EB2ROW demand?
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Spectator]

Spec,
I am not expecting very much porting from China, M&P or even ROW here is my reason
EB3C only got 4K pending so they will be crossing July 2007 by Sept 2012
also total PERM approvals for China is 2k and 4K respectively in FY 2009 & FY 2010
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EB3M&P got about 15K pending between April 05 and July 07 and also total PERM approvals for M&P is 2.5k and 6.5K respectively in FY 2009 & FY 2010, historically EB2 M&P demand is less.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EB3ROW got about 40k pending between April 05 and July 07 and about 30K PERM approvals in FY 2010 out of which we can count 50% as EB2 who already got their i485 approvals in 2010! So what ever porting from EB2ROW should be part of our estimated EB2ROW demand?
------------------------------------------------------------------------

veni,

Thanks for your reply. I enjoy your comments.

I agree that China, Mexico and Philippines probably won't contribute substantially, due to their relatively low number of EB3 AOS cases.

I think EB3-ROW is a different story.

I agree, that for relatively new cases, we can assume that the person applied in EB2 in the first place.

Where I think there will be a change (and I don't know when), is in Porting of cases within the Current backlog.

The 40k October 2010 EB3-ROW Inventory is far too low a number from what we have seen already of Local Office cases. Once they have all been accounted for, it could be as high as 70k.

That will make a huge difference to when later EB3-ROW PD get Current. That in turn will persuade people, who have held off because they thought they would be Current earlier, to do something about it.

I don't think it will be huge numbers, but 2-3k a year would make a big difference to the forward movement of EB2-IC.

I don't think it will be a factor this year.

[Spectator]

First of all let me mention that you guys are doing a great job ova here and I really appreciate y'all putting ya time into this.

I definitly do not want to claim that I understand all ya calculations or know much about this; but when I compare Visas issued and AOS subjected to Numerical Limitation for FY 2009 and FY 2010 at DOL website, I do not see much difference in visa issued for FY 2009 and FY 2010 for EB1 category. So even if FY 2011 would yield similar demand in EB1 category and with EB2 having 3/4 demand of FY 2010 per your model, why would EB2 -IC not receive similar spillover in FY 2011? I do understand that we might not get similar 10K spillover due to unavailability of SOFAD from FB.shaumack,

A welcome from me as well.

I generally agree with you.

I don't believe the potential demand shown in Q's chart will all be converted to approvals.

I see a decent chance of a respectable amount of Spillover to EB2-IC, although possibly not as much as last year due to the missing FB visas.

[qesehmk]

Spec

I like and agree w your sentence below. Spot on. That's where I think differences in opinion will be - if any. How much demand actually gets converted in 2010.



I don't believe the potential demand shown in Q's chart will all be converted to approvals.

[veni001]

veni,

Thanks for your reply. I enjoy your comments.

I agree that China, Mexico and Philippines probably won't contribute substantially, due to their relatively low number of EB3 AOS cases.

I think EB3-ROW is a different story.

I agree, that for relatively new cases, we can assume that the person applied in EB2 in the first place.

Where I think there will be a change (and I don't know when), is in Porting of cases within the Current backlog.

The 40k October 2010 EB3-ROW Inventory is far too low a number from what we have seen already of Local Office cases. Once they have all been accounted for, it could be as high as 70k.

That will make a huge difference to when later EB3-ROW PD get Current. That in turn will persuade people, who have held off because they thought they would be Current earlier, to do something about it.

I don't think it will be huge numbers, but 2-3k a year would make a big difference to the forward movement of EB2-IC.

I don't think it will be a factor this year.

Spec,
Agree, as i pointed earlier we can easily guesstimate EB1/EB2ROW demand using i140 tending from USCIS dashboard. Any significant deviation, from FY 2010 i140 receipts/completions trending, in FY 2011 will provide us some pointers. If no change in i140 trending means almost similar demand for EB1/EB2ROW for FY 2011.:)

[bieber]

veni001

can you post the link to the dashboard? thx

[qesehmk]

Friends.

Updated header w Specs predictions. Will be happy to include anybody else's predictions as well.

We are looking for EB1 SOFAD, EB2 SOFAD, EB5 SOFAD, Total SOFAD, Low End, High End SOFAD

[veni001]

veni001

can you post the link to the dashboard? thx

Bieber,
Here you go ...
http://dashboard.uscis.gov/index.cfm?formtype=7&office=71&charttype=1

[TeddyKoochu]

Q, Spec and Teddy,

I think we are underestimating the mag of EB3 to EB2 porting (6000). My company (which I am not stating due to privacy reasons with about 2000 people) recently had a policy change to allow EB3 to EB2 porting due to retention issues. About 50 people from my company (who are EB3) are now eligible to convert into EB2 and they have initiated the labor cert for those people. I think EB3 to EB2 conversion should be atleast 20000 people. I arrived the figure of 20000 based on companies similar to mine and having an extrapolation factor. I am in ATL and already know 3 consulting companies who are converting people due to retention issues.

Thanks!

Thanks for this piece of info, porting does seem to be on the rise. Last year the porting was calculated to be 3 this year my assumption is 6K but yes it could well be more. On a side note when there are too many applications from even a large company it could lead to mass denials as well, maybe you can track these cases its a long and tough road ahead. Good luck to all your colleagues, being in EB3-I is very tough.


pch053,

You ask good questions.

I can only give my personal opinion about this.

For Porting, as far as USCIS is aware, there is only a new I-140, which is obviously not part of the Inventory.

The I-485, which is, is already on the Inventory under EB3. That will only get changed at the point that the new I-140 is linked to the existing I-485 and the case is approved. In this case, the I-485 is never shown as part of the EB2 USCIS Inventory.

There is different argument as to whether USCIS are properly removing the Porting case from the EB3 Inventory figures.

Certainly, there was no evidence of Porting cases within the EB2 USCIS Inventory last year.

I think it is now impossible to analyze the Inventory in this way, even if they were added. Since the Inventory now includes pre-adjudicated cases from Local Offices, it would be impossible to tell whether the addition was due to a Porting or LO case.

Anyway, as I said, I don't think the Porting case will ever show up on the EB2 Inventory numbers.

I hope that makes sense.

Spec I agree with you a 100% on this purely based on inventory difference the calculation of porting is not possible anymore.

[TeddyKoochu]

For me, FY 2011 is a done deal and I do not expect much out of it for EB2 I+C.

But I have been thinking about what Teddy has said about EB2ROW demand falling sharply on Trackitt. Given the way things are right now, it will be very important piece of info come FY 2012. I know its long ways away. But the way things progress through USCIS, FY 2012 can be a blessing in many ways or a complete disaster.

As Eb2 I+C demand gets used up, it will very important see how USCIS progresses dates beyond July 2007 and how soon does it do it. Should it choose to open the flood gates in October 2011 - the first month of FY 2012, the whole year will be a blessing for using up the lack of demand from EB2ROW. If it waits till spillover season i.e. June 2012, it will be a disaster as there will not be enough EB2ROW and not enough EB2 I+C in the pipeline to be approved.

I guess we already new this but the Teddy's piece of info just highlights how important and fragile this will be. O the cursed stars of Eb2 I+C!

KD, Thanks, lets not give up our hopes yes, the perm surge must hit the I485 queue by Q2 latest (March end). Last year the EB2 projection based on Trackitt was accurate that is leading me to believe that maybe it could well be this year, Trackitt is not reliable for EB1 though. All thanks to your excel formula to analyze the perm case numbers.

[haripathhi]

This might be old news to most ppl, however, according to murthy.com (http://murthy.com/bulletin.html - VOL. XVII, no. 04; Jan 2011, week 4 - "Changes in Adjustment of Status Procedures for Non-Current Priority Dates"), I see this today:

"The memorandum also instructs the USCIS field offices to transfer I-485 cases that had interviews before January 1, 2011, if the priority dates are not current. These cases were to be transferred to TSC or NBC by December 31, 2010. The memorandum sets out a system for communication about the issuance of an immigrant visa number for such cases, since the field offices would have made those requests prior to the change in the procedures."

Does this not mean that the latest visa statistics report is up-to-date and that there might not be radical changes from it in their next report?

[Spectator]

This might be old news to most ppl, however, according to murthy.com (http://murthy.com/bulletin.html - VOL. XVII, no. 04; Jan 2011, week 4 - "Changes in Adjustment of Status Procedures for Non-Current Priority Dates"), I see this today:

"The memorandum also instructs the USCIS field offices to transfer I-485 cases that had interviews before January 1, 2011, if the priority dates are not current. These cases were to be transferred to TSC or NBC by December 31, 2010. The memorandum sets out a system for communication about the issuance of an immigrant visa number for such cases, since the field offices would have made those requests prior to the change in the procedures."

Does this not mean that the latest visa statistics report is up-to-date and that there might not be radical changes from it in their next report?haripathhi,

I think the pertinent part of your quote is:

transfer I-485 cases that had interviews before January 1, 2011

That leaves all the cases that have NOT had an interview at the Local Offices and therefore invisible.

The January Inventory suggested that Local Offices are only interviwing those people within a few months of the current Cut Off Date. That leaves potentially thousands and tens of thousands of cases that remain invisible. The actual number is unknowable and will only be seen over the course of several years.

It will be interesting to see how many more are added in the 3 month period to the next USCIS Inventory.

[happyboy]

I missed 2007 bus . I am just looking for EAD which can change my life entirely.
What are the chances to open flood gates this year or moving the prioririty date to past of my priority data june 2007

[haripathhi]

I missed 2007 bus . I am just looking for EAD which can change my life entirely.
What are the chances to open flood gates this year or moving the prioririty date to past of my priority data june 2007

Please refer to the header of this thread regarding this.

[haripathhi]

haripathhi,

I think the pertinent part of your quote is:


That leaves all the cases that have NOT had an interview at the Local Offices and therefore invisible.

The January Inventory suggested that Local Offices are only interviwing those people within a few months of the current Cut Off Date. That leaves potentially thousands and tens of thousands of cases that remain invisible. The actual number is unknowable and will only be seen over the course of several years.

It will be interesting to see how many more are added in the 3 month period to the next USCIS Inventory.

Thanks Spec, I had overlooked that part...damn....I got excited for nothing! lol.

[qesehmk]

I missed 2007 bus . I am just looking for EAD which can change my life entirely.
What are the chances to open flood gates this year or moving the prioririty date to past of my priority data june 2007

Happyboy welcome to forum. This year the chances seem slim to none to me. (others might say 20-30%). Next year the chances are very good.

I understand why you are so eager for it. Best wishes.

[qesehmk]

In a way this is also a turf battle. Why would a field office offload its work to a federal agency. It would rather keep the work and have its own people employed.

Just a curious thought.


haripathhi,

I think the pertinent part of your quote is:


That leaves all the cases that have NOT had an interview at the Local Offices and therefore invisible.

The January Inventory suggested that Local Offices are only interviwing those people within a few months of the current Cut Off Date. That leaves potentially thousands and tens of thousands of cases that remain invisible. The actual number is unknowable and will only be seen over the course of several years.

It will be interesting to see how many more are added in the 3 month period to the next USCIS Inventory.

[SaturnRing]

First of all Thanks everybody for your wonderful analysis.

When the dates cross Jul 2007, may be in mid 2012 or 2013, do you think they will make Eb2 current for a month before retrogressing the dates again ? 'Cause technically the demand will be less than supply, so shouldn't it be "C" ?

Any thoughts ?

[qesehmk]

Saturn welcome!

This has been discussed in the past. Different permutations combinations are available and DoS can take any route it wishes to.

Current has different connotations: 1) The date is today's date and everybody can file. 2) The date is past my PD and so I can file or get adjusted etc.


If in 2012, 2007 date is becoming current then its obviously scenario 2 we are talking about. If they move date to 2012 then it becomes really CURRENT (as in current marati hai!) !! Under scenario 1, everybody between 2007-12 will be able to file 485 and obvilously the demand will be way higher than supply and they will fall back. Under scenario 2 DoS can move dates just enough to keep new demand and the dates won't retrogress.

Bottomline - if the dates are moved violently then certainly expect the dates to fall back. Otherwise they can slowly progress without retrogression.





First of all Thanks everybody for your wonderful analysis.

When the dates cross Jul 2007, may be in mid 2012 or 2013, do you think they will make Eb2 current for a month before retrogressing the dates again ? 'Cause technically the demand will be less than supply, so shouldn't it be "C" ?

Any thoughts ?

[TeddyKoochu]

Acknowledgement - Ron Gotcher Forum & Attorney Ron Gotcher
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/visa-quota-and-cutoff-date-issues-66/annual-report-of-the-visa-office-for-2010-has-been-released-13240/#post55179

Refer post # 9 to read Ron's comments.

"Getting an EB1 approval is difficult. Overall, only about 10% of EB1a and EB1b petitions are approved. The CIS has set illegal and unrealistically high standards. Given the facts that you have recited, I doubt that you would be in the ballpark for favorable consideration. This is not to denigrate your skills, only a recognition that the CIS applies absurdly high standards. "

Friends your comments and thoughts.

[Spectator]

In a way this is also a turf battle. Why would a field office offload its work to a federal agency. It would rather keep the work and have its own people employed.

Just a curious thought.Q,

I understand what you are saying.

The Field Offices are also part of the same agency - USCIS, although I agree there is probably competition between them and the Service Centers. They may not necessarily like it, but they are orders from higher up the chain of command.

Retaining pre-adjudicated cases at LO doesn't provide much work. All that is needed is final approval when the PD becomes Current. I accept if that is a long interval, then certain checks may be required before doing so.

I am far more cynical about it. As Ron Gotcher would say "USCIS have a long record of minimizing and disguising the true extent of the backlog (mainly from Congress)". It has suited USCIS in the past to keep cases at Field Offices, so they can minimize the numbers.

The fact that the new Management will no longer put up with this situation and are trying to be more transparent is a ray of hope. I suspect they are also being prodded by DOS on this issue. I don't think there is the manpower to conduct a full Inventory of cases that remain at the LO.

My thoughts anyway.

[Spectator]

Acknowledgement - Ron Gotcher Forum & Attorney Ron Gotcher
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/visa-quota-and-cutoff-date-issues-66/annual-report-of-the-visa-office-for-2010-has-been-released-13240/#post55179

Refer post # 9 to read Ron's comments.

"Getting an EB1 approval is difficult. Overall, only about 10% of EB1a and EB1b petitions are approved. The CIS has set illegal and unrealistically high standards. Given the facts that you have recited, I doubt that you would be in the ballpark for favorable consideration. This is not to denigrate your skills, only a recognition that the CIS applies absurdly high standards. "

Friends your comments and thoughts.Teddy,

I've seen Ron quote that figure before. In many ways it would make sense, but when you think about the figures that implies, it doesn't.

At 2.1 approvals per I-140, you would need 19k approved I-140 applications for 40k I-485 approvals.

If that represents a 10% approval rate, then 190k I-140s must have been submitted.

There just aren't enough I-140s submitted in a year to cover that, let alone all the EB2 Current applications.

Or am I missing something?

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy,

I've seen Ron quote that figure before. In many ways it would make sense, but when you think about the figures that implies, it doesn't.

At 2.1 approvals per I-140, you would need 19k approved I-140 applications for 40k I-485 approvals.

If that represents a 10% approval rate, then 190k I-140s must have been submitted.

There just aren't enough I-140s submitted in a year to cover that, let alone all the EB2 and EB3 applications.

Or am I missing something?

Spec he is talking about EB1 A & B only, if this is his recent experience that only say 10% I140's are being approved in this category it might correlate well with the Trackitt trend. EB1 cases take longer than EB2 or EB3. EB1C is still the larger consumer of EB1.

[Spectator]

Spec he is talking about EB1 A & B only, if this is his recent experience that only say 10% I140's are being approved in this category it might correlate well with the Trackitt trend. EB1 cases take longer than EB2 or EB3.He's quoted this figure for several years.

EB1A & B still make up 40% of cases. It doesn't get any better if you exclude EB1C. The figures are still unmanageable.

If you think EB1C has declined, then EB1A & B must be higher % of the total, since EB1 still reached 41k last year.

The fact they take longer is really of no consequence, it just implies that more flow through from year to year. The number of I-140s needed would still be the same. If more were needed from the previous year, then more would flow through to the next year.

To be honest, I would have thought that such a high denial rate would also be reflected in Trackitt, at least to some extent - it isn't.

[TeddyKoochu]

He's quoted this figure for several years.

EB1A & B still make up 40% of cases. It doesn't get any better if you exclude EB1C. The figures are still unmanageable.

If you think EB1C has declined, then EB1A & B must be higher % of the total, since EB1 still reached 41k last year.

The fact they take longer is really of no consequence, it just implies that more flow through from year to year. The number of I-140s needed would still be the same. If more were needed from the previous year, then more would flow through to the next year.

Lets do a rough calculation 40K I485's mean 17.7K I140's (2.25).

Now out of these 40% are EB1 A & B this gives ~ 7K I-140's.

I agree if we extrapolate this 10 fold its extremely unrealistic given the number of receipts per the I140 dashboard but say if the rate is 1/2 not 1/10 stated by Ron does that look realistic ? Even 50% is a very high denial rate. If this is a recent phenomenon it will have a huge bearing on this year.

[Spectator]

Lets do a rough calculation 40K I485's mean 17.7K I140's (2.25).

Now out of these 40% are EB1 A & B this gives ~ 7K I-140's.

I agree if we extrapolate this 10 fold its extremely unrealistic given the number of receipts per the I140 dashboard but say if the rate is 1/2 not 1/10 stated by Ron does that look realistic ? Even 50% is a very high denial rate. If this is a recent phenomenon it will have a huge bearing on this year.Just for interest, the denial rates on Trackitt in FY2010 were :

EB1A - 19.3%
EB1B - 2.7%
EB1C - 2.5%

The fact that EB1A is much higher than the others should be no surprise. It is the only sub-category that can be self-sponsored and I think we have all seen some applications bound to fail.

Maybe we just have to agree to disagree on this one. :)

[qesehmk]

Spec

I think we r on same page overall but there are some nuances where there may be different thoughts...


....

they are orders from higher up the chain of command.
....
I think it only matters a little bit. The chain of command here is much weaker except in Military.

I am far more cynical about it. As Ron Gotcher would say "USCIS have a long record of minimizing and disguising the true extent of the backlog (mainly from Congress)". It has suited USCIS in the past to keep cases at Field Offices, so they can minimize the numbers.
Agree

The fact that the new Management will no longer put up with this situation and are trying to be more transparent is a ray of hope.
The objective may not necessarily be transparency. Its one thing that is may be useful to people like u and me. But the objective could be strategic immigration. I don't know ...

I suspect they are also being prodded by DOS on this issue.

Absolutely yes.

I don't think there is the manpower to conduct a full Inventory of cases that remain at the LO.
Thats not true. Its a good excuse though.




Teddy, I think Spec has a point there. I have seen Ron making very wild allegations and is sometimes seems to blame USCIS too much for nothing. Your point about EB1A/B is valid however still I think Spec's logic still applies to those two sub categories. I don't think that the usage there is so low that 10% approval rate is possible.


Spec he is talking about EB1 A & B only, if this is his recent experience that only say 10% I140's are being approved in this category it might correlate well with the Trackitt trend. EB1 cases take longer than EB2 or EB3. EB1C is still the larger consumer of EB1.

[TeddyKoochu]

Just for interest, the denial rates on Trackitt in FY2010 were :

EB1A - 19.3%
EB1B - 2.7%
EB1C - 2.5%

The fact that EB1A is much higher than the others should be no surprise. It is the only sub-category that can be self-sponsored and I think we have all seen some applications bound to fail.

Maybe we just have to agree to disagree on this one. :)

Thanks Spec for your feedback. I do agree with your view about EB1-A. Trackitt however is not good in measuring denials people would tend to not update that case itself.

[Spectator]

Thanks Spec for your feedback. I do agree with your view about EB1-A. Trackitt however is not good in measuring denials people would tend to not update that case itself.
I'm not disagreeing. If they were denied, most would simply remove their profile or simply not update it. The point of the post was to show that Trackitt does not reflect Ron's figure at all, not that they should be relied on.

As an aside, you should read some of the AAO decisions for EB1A. One that amused me was a denial for someone claiming to have Extraordinary Ability in the art of Paper Silhouette making. It shows how diverse the category can be.

[TeddyKoochu]

I'm not disagreeing. If they were denied, most would simply remove their profile or simply not update it. The point of the post was to show that Trackitt does not reflect Ron's figure at all, not that they should be relied on.

As an aside, you should read some of the AAO decisions for EB1A. One that amused me was a denial for someone claiming to have Extraordinary Ability in the art of Paper Silhouette making. It shows how diverse the category can be.

Spec neither Trackitt’s figure nor what Ron is saying is true the truth probably lies in between. I have seen people filing both an EB2-NIW and EB1-A just to be safe. I agree with some of the EB1-A cases can be really interesting. EB1 is definitely what holds the key to our fortunes lets keep finding all avenues to estimate / guesstimate this.

[pch053]

10% acceptance of EB1A and EB1B seems really low to me. In fact, I would have more thought of the denial rate to be around 10 - 20%. I can tell of 5 cases in EB1A category that I have seen getting approved in the past 3 years. For 2 of those cases, the credentials were very strong (in my opinion) and they got approved very quickly (~few weeks) without any RFEs. The other 3 cases were more of the type of borderline cases. As we all know that EB1A & B has requires lot of qualitative judgment like publications (how to judge how good the publication is), citation of one's work (how many number of places one's work needs to be cited), etc. A couple of the above cases got RFE's and took relatively longer time (almost 1 year) but got approved at the end. I am not sure whether Ron's 10% acceptance of EB1A/B is a recent phenomena or not but from what I have seen, the % will be probably much higher in the previous years.

[bieber]

veni thx for the link

Ron's 10% approval seems exaggerated, hope he is right and we get 25-30k sofad from EB1 :D

[veni001]

haripathhi,

I think the pertinent part of your quote is:


That leaves all the cases that have NOT had an interview at the Local Offices and therefore invisible.

The January Inventory suggested that Local Offices are only interviwing those people within a few months of the current Cut Off Date. That leaves potentially thousands and tens of thousands of cases that remain invisible. The actual number is unknowable and will only be seen over the course of several years.

It will be interesting to see how many more are added in the 3 month period to the next USCIS Inventory.

I don't see basis for this assumption, at least for EB1/EB2, since we have all PERM data available on DOL website from 2000-2010 and also i140 information from USCIS dash board for last couple of years in additionUSCIS pending inventory reports, Am i missing some thing here:confused:

[ChampU]

Hi Guys,

Thanks for taking the time to analyze the EB2/EB3 numbers. I have been following this forum for a while and finally decided to join you guys! I have a few questions for the gurus:

1. I had read SOFAD projections for EB2 to be in the 25-35k range. Are those estimates,still accurate? I had read about higher EB1/EB5 approvals and a lot of porting from EB3-EB2 might knock down the SOFAD.
2. If the H.R. 4 is enacted into a law, 55k visas might get infused in the EB category. The effective date is listed as 10/01/2011. Would these visas be distributed amongst the EB categories like other EB visas (28.6% for EB1/2/3)?
3. Any idea how the DV Lottery numbers are alloted? Quarterly/one time during the fiscal year?
4. My PD is 02/2008. I have no hopes of anything happening this year. Can I expect my case to be current in 2012?

Thanks!
ChampU

[veni001]

Hi Guys,

Thanks for taking the time to analyze the EB2/EB3 numbers. I have been following this forum for a while and finally decided to join you guys! I have a few questions for the gurus:

1. I had read SOFAD projections for EB2 to be in the 25-35k range. Are those estimates,still accurate? I had read about higher EB1/EB5 approvals and a lot of porting from EB3-EB2 might knock down the SOFAD.
2. If the H.R. 4 is enacted into a law, 55k visas might get infused in the EB category. The effective date is listed as 10/01/2011. Would these visas be distributed amongst the EB categories like other EB visas (28.6% for EB1/2/3)?
3. Any idea how the DV Lottery numbers are alloted? Quarterly/one time during the fiscal year?
4. My PD is 02/2008. I have no hopes of anything happening this year. Can I expect my case to be current in 2012?

Thanks!
ChampU

ChampU,
Your profile show your PD as 01/01/2001:confused:

[ChampU]

I had a tough time reading the "registration image" . Had to do it twice (weekend brain freeze) and since the PD was optional, I kind of gave up on it. :o

My actual PD is 02/22/2008.

[haripathhi]

I had a tough time reading the "registration image" . Had to do it twice (weekend brain freeze) and since the PD was optional, I kind of gave up on it. :o

My actual PD is 02/22/2008.

I second that, its tough to read the "registration image" that comes up. Even I had to do it more than a couple of times to get it right....just a thought for the moderator :).

Welcome to the forum ChampU!

[veni001]

I had a tough time reading the "registration image" . Had to do it twice (weekend brain freeze) and since the PD was optional, I kind of gave up on it. :o

My actual PD is 02/22/2008.

OK, unless there is dramatic change in the demand(increase/decrease) or change in the law( both are unknown) you can count on rule of 5 for EB2, i.e you should be able to file by Sept 2013.:)

[qesehmk]

ChampU pls read teh header as well as 4-5 pages back into the thread to get an idea of latest thoughts on this thread.

Regarding H.R. 4, yes if enacted it seems that it will bump up EB quota by DV lottery quota overall. So obviously EB1/2/3 all get benefited. Not sure how DV visa is allocated. I would imagine must be applied evently and no question of spillover given they know exactly who is selected.

Regarding your date - it has some chance of being current in 2012. But 2013 seems more realistic.


Hi Guys,

Thanks for taking the time to analyze the EB2/EB3 numbers. I have been following this forum for a while and finally decided to join you guys! I have a few questions for the gurus:

1. I had read SOFAD projections for EB2 to be in the 25-35k range. Are those estimates,still accurate? I had read about higher EB1/EB5 approvals and a lot of porting from EB3-EB2 might knock down the SOFAD.
2. If the H.R. 4 is enacted into a law, 55k visas might get infused in the EB category. The effective date is listed as 10/01/2011. Would these visas be distributed amongst the EB categories like other EB visas (28.6% for EB1/2/3)?
3. Any idea how the DV Lottery numbers are alloted? Quarterly/one time during the fiscal year?
4. My PD is 02/2008. I have no hopes of anything happening this year. Can I expect my case to be current in 2012?

Thanks!
ChampU



Regarding the difficulties, unfortunately the functionality is out of the box. So not sure how it can be improved. Would appreciate if anybody has any advice.



I had a tough time reading the "registration image" . Had to do it twice (weekend brain freeze) and since the PD was optional, I kind of gave up on it. :o

My actual PD is 02/22/2008.


I second that, its tough to read the "registration image" that comes up. Even I had to do it more than a couple of times to get it right....just a thought for the moderator :).

Welcome to the forum ChampU!

[veni001]

Q, Spec and Teddy,

I think we are underestimating the mag of EB3 to EB2 porting (6000). My company (which I am not stating due to privacy reasons with about 2000 people) recently had a policy change to allow EB3 to EB2 porting due to retention issues. About 50 people from my company (who are EB3) are now eligible to convert into EB2 and they have initiated the labor cert for those people. I think EB3 to EB2 conversion should be atleast 20000 people. I arrived the figure of 20000 based on companies similar to mine and having an extrapolation factor. I am in ATL and already know 3 consulting companies who are converting people due to retention issues.

Thanks!

FYI - Interesting article about EB3 to EB2 porting with current employer (http://us-non-immigrants.blogspot.com/2011/01/eb3-to-eb2-porting-with-same-current.html) posted in other forums

[Spectator]

I don't see basis for this assumption, at least for EB1/EB2, .........
Am i missing some thing here:confused:Sorry for the delay in replying. I somewhat misread your post.

The comment was made in the context of why there may be more future Porting from EB3 other than India, so it was implicitly talking about EB3 only.

So it is not an issue for EB1 or EB2-Current. So far, EB2-Retrogressed sees little effect from LO cases being added to the Inventory.

[veni001]

Sorry for the delay in replying. I somewhat misread your post.

The comment was made in the context of why there may be more future Porting from EB3 other than India, so it was implicitly talking about EB3 only.

So it is not an issue for EB1 or EB2-Current. So far, EB2-Retrogressed sees little effect from LO cases being added to the Inventory.

Spec, and All,
Thanks for clarifying me on this; in any event, we have been counting ROW porting as part of new EB2ROW demand. Here is my reason why ROW porting may not be very significant than what it is now…

USCIS Inventory shows about 49k ROW- i485 (EB2&EB3) pending between June 2005 and July 2007 as of 10-01-2010.

Let’s look at the PERM and EB2 approval data for ROW since 2005 not including M&P…

2005:
ROW PERM Certified – 3,536
EB2 –i485 approval – 16,501

2006:
ROW PERM Certified – 41,858
EB2 –i485 approval – 14,420

2007:
ROW PERM Certified – 41,430
EB2 –i485 approval – 28,892

2008:
ROW PERM Certified – 23,890
EB2 –i485 approval – 44,934

2009:
ROW PERM Certified – 13,597
EB2 –i485 approval – 30,123

2010:
ROW PERM Certified – 30,644
EB2 –i485 approval – 24,427

Since i485 approvals in 2005 exceed the total projected demand, even if we assume all ROW PERMs as EB2 only result in 8K i485 (3,536*2.2=7,780) only, let's assume it as backlog reduction and take year 2005 out as an exception for our calculations.

Now let’s see all ROW PERM approvals between 2006 -2010 = 41.8k+41.4k+23.8k+13.5k+30.6k =151.4k

Let’s assume all certified PERMs will make it to i140 and apply15% denial rate at i140 stage which gives us about 129k ROW i140 (EB2&EB3) approvals.

Let’s apply our factor 2.2 for all approved i140 gives us 284k i485 applications, we need to factor EB2-NIW to this number to derive the actual i485 for ROW (EB2&EB3), let’s assume it as 3k per year which gives us about 300k i485 applications for ROW (EB2&EB3) between 2006-10.

Now let’s see all ROW EB2 i485 approvals between 2006-2010 =14.4k+28.8k+44.9k+30.1k+24.4k ~=143k
Now let’s see all ROW EB3 i485 approvals between 2006-2010 =44.9k+37.1k+29.8k+26.3k+24.3k ~=163k

Note: We know that NVC got about 120k EB3 cases but most of them are 245(i) cases.

So if we add all of them (49k+143k+163k) we are looking at 355k i485 for ROW-EB2/3 (not including M&P) between 2006-10. Since backlog centers are closed long time back, I don’t think any EB3 ROW with priority date before May 2005 is still waiting to apply for i485.

Conclusion: I don’t believe there will be many EB3 ROW cases (or the dark demand) at the LO level to add to EB3 ROW inventory, except CP case or PWMB cases.

[qesehmk]

great post! thanks veni.

p.s. I am working on different scenarios. should post tonight.


Spec, and All,
Thanks for clarifying me on this; in any event, we have been counting ROW porting as part of new EB2ROW demand. Here is my reason why ROW porting may not be very significant than what it is now…

USCIS Inventory shows about 49k ROW- i485 (EB2&EB3) pending between June 2005 and July 2007 as of 10-01-2010.

Let’s look at the PERM and EB2 approval data for ROW since 2005 not including M&P…

2005:
ROW PERM Certified – 3,536
EB2 –i485 approval – 16,501

2006:
ROW PERM Certified – 41,858
EB2 –i485 approval – 14,420

2007:
ROW PERM Certified – 41,430
EB2 –i485 approval – 28,892

2008:
ROW PERM Certified – 23,890
EB2 –i485 approval – 44,934

2009:
ROW PERM Certified – 13,597
EB2 –i485 approval – 30,123

2010:
ROW PERM Certified – 30,644
EB2 –i485 approval – 24,427

Since i485 approvals in 2005 exceed the total projected demand, even if we assume all ROW PERMs as EB2 only result in 8K i485 (3,536*2.2=7,780) only, let's assume it as backlog reduction and take year 2005 out as an exception for our calculations.

Now let’s see all ROW PERM approvals between 2006 -2010 = 41.8k+41.4k+23.8k+13.5k+30.6k =151.4k

Let’s assume all certified PERMs will make it to i140 and apply15% denial rate at i140 stage which gives us about 129k ROW i140 (EB2&EB3) approvals.

Let’s apply our factor 2.2 for all approved i140 gives us 284k i485 applications, we need to factor EB2-NIW to this number to derive the actual i485 for ROW (EB2&EB3), let’s assume it as 3k per year which gives us about 300k i485 applications for ROW (EB2&EB3) between 2006-10.

Now let’s see all ROW EB2 i485 approvals between 2006-2010 =14.4k+28.8k+44.9k+30.1k+24.4k ~=143k
Now let’s see all ROW EB3 i485 approvals between 2006-2010 =44.9k+37.1k+29.8k+26.3k+24.3k ~=163k

Note: We know that NVC got about 120k EB3 cases but most of them are 245(i) cases.

So if we add all of them (49k+143k+163k) we are looking at 355k i485 for ROW-EB2/3 (not including M&P) between 2006-10. Since backlog centers are closed long time back, I don’t think any EB3 ROW with priority date before May 2005 is still waiting to apply for i485.

Conclusion: I don’t believe there will be many EB3 ROW cases (or the dark demand) at the LO level to add to EB3 ROW inventory, except CP case or PWMB cases.

[Spectator]

So if we add all of them (49k+143k+163k) we are looking at 355k i485 for ROW-EB2/3 (not including M&P) between 2006-10. Since backlog centers are closed long time back, I don’t think any EB3 ROW with priority date before May 2005 is still waiting to apply for i485.

Conclusion: I don’t believe there will be many EB3 ROW cases (or the dark demand) at the LO level to add to EB3 ROW inventory, except CP case or PWMB cases.Veni,

Other than possibly a few more 245i cases, I totally agree that there are very few cases before 2005 still to appear. They should have been added into the January Inventory already.

The problem is with "dark demand" post August 2005.

If you look at the January 2011 EB3-ROW Inventory, it has increased by 7,198 over the October 2010 Inventory.

When further analyzed, there are actually 8,362 pure additions. Then you have to account for reductions that would be expected due to Approvals in Q1 2011 (I think it is nearer 4k than the 6.5k than could have been made). In fact the Inventory only shows a reduction of around 500 in the period that was Current, so there must also have been a further 3,500 additions.

The real additions to the EB3-ROW Inventory as a result of LO cases is therefore 8,362 + 3500 = 11,862.

The adjusted October Inventory thus becomes 40,429 + 11,862 = 52,291. That is an increase of 29%.

However, further analysis shows that nearly half of the 8,362 additions took place in the period May to August 2005, just ahead of the current Cut Off Date for EB3-ROW.

That leads to the conclusion that the LO are not yet interviewing many people with PD later than August 2005.

They will only do so as the Cut Off Date for EB3-ROW advances. That still leaves cases with PD in 2006 and 2007 to become visible.

It is almost certain that there are substantial numbers of further LO cases to appear as the interviews are conducted. Actually, potentially frightening numbers.

A back calculation from the number of cases that were probably pending just after July 2007 (July 2007 contributed 320,000 I-485 cases alone - USCIS figure) and subsequent approvals also shows that there is a very large gap compared to the present USCIS Inventory.

Something to ponder on.

I wish to reserve judgement on the subject until we have seen some more Inventories - probably a year's worth. I do not intend to comment on it further, because it is not relevant to this year's calculation.

[veni001]

Veni,

Other than possibly a few more 245i cases, I totally agree that there are very few cases before 2005 still to appear. They should have been added into the January Inventory already.

The problem is with "dark demand" post August 2005.
...........
..........
..........

Something to ponder on.

I wish to reserve judgement on the subject until we have seen some more Inventories - probably a year's worth. I do not intend to comment on it further, because it is not relevant to this year's calculation.

Thanks Spec,
I totally agree with you, we may have to wait until Q4 and see how EB3 ROW inventory changes.

I assume all these EB3 cases need a Labor approval, that's the reason my analysis is based on Labor approvals.

I am not sure the chances of NVC inventory to start showing up(as the cases are being slowly transferred) as part of USCIS inventory.

Let's move on...

[Spectator]

Thanks Spec,
I totally agree with you, we may have to wait until Q4 and see how EB3 ROW inventory changes.

I assume all these EB3 cases need a Labor approval, that's the reason my analysis is based on Labor approvals.

I am not sure the chances of NVC inventory to start showing up(as the cases are being slowly transferred) as part of USCIS inventory.

Let's move on...I don't think NVC cases are applicable to LO or the USCIS Inventory. LO are part of USCIS and only deal with AOS cases.

NVC cases go to a Foreign Consulate for interview under CP.

Agreed ...... :) It's bloody complicated, isn't it.

[qesehmk]

Friends, I must acknolwedge & apologize for a huge mistake I made when I posted my last model. The mistake was to assume wrong EB2 ROW demand and Same Year Approvals in 2011. Because of this I forecasted the most pessimistic scenario.

Now I have corrrected both those mistakes and the picture is not that bad anymore. Please check out the updated header.

With this update we are tossing two new factors which we think will be quite crucial going ahead.
a) Rate of 485 filings for EB2-ROW compared to previous year.
b) Same Year Approval of 485 filed in 2010-11.

These two factors will determine the SOFAD. As of now it seems like the SOFAD will be 23.5K (20K towards backlog) and will move dates to Nov 2006. For details pls read the header.

Once again apologize for the huge upset I pulled last week because of this oversight. Good luck!

[TeluguBidda]

Friends, I must acknolwedge & apologize for a huge mistake I made when I posted my last model. The mistake was to assume wrong EB2 ROW demand and Same Year Approvals in 2011. Because of this I forecasted the most pessimistic scenario.

Now I have corrrected both those mistakes and the picture is not that bad anymore. Please check out the updated header.

With this update we are tossing two new factors which we think will be quite crucial going ahead.
a) Rate of 485 filings for EB2-ROW compared to previous year.
b) Same Year Approval of 485 filed in 2010-11.

These two factors will determine the SOFAD. As of now it seems like the SOFAD will be 23.5K (20K towards backlog) and will move dates to Nov 2006. For details pls read the header.

Once again apologize for the huge upset I pulled last week because of this oversight. Good luck!

Thanks much. It gives me a light of hope personally, as my priority date is 11/29/2006. I am just hoping that it at least touches December 1st 2006. I am hope my wish is not too unrealistic.

[pch053]

Thanks qesehmk; I think we all will feel better with the new prediction. If I remember the numbers correctly, 'sangiano' in trackitt did some calculations/predictions where it required around 27K - 28K SOFAD for EB2-I & EB2-C PDs to move to end of Dec'06. I think your calculation results are on similar lines, meaning ~23K SOFAD will put the PD around Nov'06 by the end of FY'11.

[qesehmk]

Thanks qesehmk; I think we all will feel better with the new prediction. If I remember the numbers correctly, 'sangiano' in trackitt did some calculations/predictions where it required around 27K - 28K SOFAD for EB2-I & EB2-C PDs to move to end of Dec'06. I think your calculation results are on similar lines, meaning ~23K SOFAD will put the PD around Nov'06 by the end of FY'11.
PCH, i too have a vested interest in this. However, I tend to be overcautious by nature. But even more so after last years' unforeseen PERM surge. Without that surge, all or most of EB2 backlog would be cleared. That PERM surge was what Don Rumsfeld used to call "unknown unknowns"!! I think we should continue to watch for such unknown unknowns.

Having said that, this year there could be a favorable unknown unknown in EB1. The trackitt EB1 data is too good to be true. 65 approvals total YTD compared to 224 in 2010. However, there are still not sufficient signs to say that the data is decisively predicting a trend. I will write a separate post on this situation.


Thanks much. It gives me a light of hope personally, as my priority date is 11/29/2006. I am just hoping that it at least touches December 1st 2006. I am hope my wish is not too unrealistic.
Bidda, for you its really close. I think there is a very decent change u may get it.

[angryclubs]

Man my PD is March 2007. This wait is killing me

[arorasa]

Friends, I must acknolwedge & apologize for a huge mistake I made when I posted my last model. The mistake was to assume wrong EB2 ROW demand and Same Year Approvals in 2011. Because of this I forecasted the most pessimistic scenario.

Now I have corrrected both those mistakes and the picture is not that bad anymore. Please check out the updated header.

With this update we are tossing two new factors which we think will be quite crucial going ahead.
a) Rate of 485 filings for EB2-ROW compared to previous year.
b) Same Year Approval of 485 filed in 2010-11.

These two factors will determine the SOFAD. As of now it seems like the SOFAD will be 23.5K (20K towards backlog) and will move dates to Nov 2006. For details pls read the header.

Once again apologize for the huge upset I pulled last week because of this oversight. Good luck!

Thanks for that update Q! You've just turned on the light at the end of the tunnel.

[veni001]

...................

Having said that, this year there could be a favorable unknown unknown in EB1. The trackitt EB1 data is too good to be true. 65 approvals total YTD compared to 224 in 2010. However, there are still not sufficient signs to say that the data is decisively predicting a trend. I will write a separate post on this situation.

.....................



Q,
That's right, let's hope EB1 demand goes back to 2006 or 2007 level!
Veni

[ChampU]

Thanks a lot, Q!! So EB2-I can get around 12-14k visas..5-7k less than last year..Thats still good news..

[qesehmk]

Thanks a lot, Q!! So EB2-I can get around 12-14k visas..5-7k less than last year..Thats still good news..

Roughly the split of 20 between India China should be 15-5.

[veni001]

Roughly the split of 20 between India China should be 15-5.

Q,
As we know that Sept 2008 PD was at Aug 2006 so PWMB should be very less or even zero until 01AUG06,except porting cases, and 20k should take us into Jan 2007?

[qesehmk]

Veni,

I think PWMB wouldn't seriously kick in until Feb-March 2007. My numbers don't include PWMB. Nov-Dec 06 is conceivable w 20K. Jan 07 would be slight stretch.

But then 20K itself is a guess. So I guess yes .. may be.


Q,
As we know that Sept 2008 PD was at Aug 2006 so PWMB should be very less or even zero until 01AUG06,except porting cases, and 20k should take us into Jan 2007?

[veni001]

Veni,

I think PWMB wouldn't seriously kick in until Feb-March 2007. My numbers don't include PWMB. Nov-Dec 06 is conceivable w 20K. Jan 07 would be slight stretch.

But then 20K itself is a guess. So I guess yes .. may be.

Q,
Assuming China's regular 2.8 k will clear them up to Aug 2006 then thy got only 3k pending before 1JAN2007. If our estimate is 20k then it will be 17+3(I+C). Let's hope EB1 demand will go back to at least 2007 level :)

[doodle]

Experts,

I have a PD 11/14/2006 EB2 India.

Currently I am on H1 so that my wife has H4 until my PD becomes current..
My wife is not included in the 485 appl.

How realistic is that my PD becomes Current in July/Aug/Sep 2011 ?

Appreciate your replies

[veni001]

Experts,

I have a PD 11/14/2006 EB2 India.

Currently I am on H1 so that my wife has H4 until my PD becomes current..
My wife is not included in the 485 appl.

How realistic is that my PD becomes Current in July/Aug/Sep 2011 ?

Appreciate your replies

Doodle,
I think you have 90-10 chance by Sept 2011.

[qesehmk]

Friends ...

If you can afford the time, read this.

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/03/04/07-56774.pdf

This is very illuminating and can have significant change in EB1 and EB2-ROW approvals.

[veni001]

Friends ...

If you can afford the time, read this.

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/03/04/07-56774.pdf

This is very illuminating and can have significant change in EB1 and EB2-ROW approvals.

Very interesting, I was wondering about the case behind Kazarian Guidance memo(08/18/2010).

[qesehmk]

Guys ... here is another way to look at our predictions and its confirmation. This is quite crude .... but just like we did last year... its always good to try to see if from multiple angles our theories fit together.

12 month rolling 140s 73000
Less IC Labors 39,822
Less EB3 ROW 29,822
Less 5% Denials 28,331
485 Filings 62,328
Less 5% Denials 59,212
EB1 + EB2 ROW MP quota 74,000
IC Quota 6,000
SOFAD 20,788

Which is exactly what our model says. Since labors also include conversions .... dont need to take out them from this number.



Very interesting, I was wondering about the case behind Kazarian Guidance memo(08/18/2010).

veni.... that's an interesting topic. I am still trying to understand and verify. But in nutshell ... I think this should at least slow down new EB1 EB2 applications approvals. It could further increase denial rate which is a good thing for backlogged countries. However today we don't see EB1 backlog buildup or EB1 denials. Trackitt data is not good on that front.

[veni001]

Guys ...
.......
......
EB1 + EB2 ROW MP quota 74,000
IC Quota 6,000
SOFAD 20,788

Which is exactly what our model says. Since labors also include conversions .... don't need to take out them from this number.



veni.... that's an interesting topic. I am still trying to understand and verify. But in nutshell ... I think this should at least slow down new EB1 EB2 applications approvals. It could further increase denial rate which is a good thing for backlogged countries. However today we don't see EB1 backlog buildup or EB1 denials. Trackitt data is not good on that front.

Agree



Q,
You mean the estimated demand, am i correct?

[qesehmk]

Veni

Est demand using that approach would be 59K for EB1+EB2ROW. 74K is the quota for those two combined. So FA+FD = 15K. Then you add EB2IC quota of 5.5K .... thats your total SOFAD = 20.5K !

Makes sense?


Q,
You mean the estimated demand, am i correct?

[happyboy]

According to the info i got from my friends who are working in Big indian outsource companies it is hard in these days to convense the management to apply for EB1.
Some one can shed some light on this if you guys have any contacts

[veni001]

Veni

Est demand using that approach would be 59K for EB1+EB2ROW. 74K is the quota for those two combined. So FA+FD = 15K. Then you add EB2IC quota of 5.5K .... thats your total SOFAD = 20.5K !

Makes sense?

Yes,
Thanks Q

[veni001]

According to the info i got from my friends who are working in Big indian outsource companies it is hard in these days to convense the management to apply for EB1.
Some one can shed some light on this if you guys have any contacts

Happyboy,
Not only economy but also Kazarian Guidance Memo dated 08-18-2010 has some impact on EB1 applications, we will know in few more months!

[TeluguBidda]

Happyboy,
Not only economy but also Kazarian Guidance Memo dated 08-18-2010 has some impact on EB1 applications, we will know in few more months!

If they are unable to apply in EB-1, they will end up applying in EB-2. Wouldn't it be true in that case that there would not be any positive impact on spillover for EB-2?

If they are from retrogressed countries, priority date would come into play. However, I doubt if there is a large difference between # of EB-1IC applicants vs. other countries.

[qesehmk]

Bidda

There are 11-12K EB1-IC candidates. Besides .... not all EB1 ROW candidates may be able to find a sponsor!! Thirdly ... the EB2 itself is not exempt from all the scrutiny because of Kazarian case and the memo. So we will see EB2 standards toughen too resulting into increased cycle time (which in the long run doesn't help or hurt, but in the short run helps.)


If they are unable to apply in EB-1, they will end up applying in EB-2. Wouldn't it be true in that case that there would not be any positive impact on spillover for EB-2?

If they are from retrogressed countries, priority date would come into play. However, I doubt if there is a large difference between # of EB-1IC applicants vs. other countries.

[veni001]

Bidda

There are 11-12K EB1-IC candidates. Besides .... not all EB1 ROW candidates may be able to find a sponsor!! Thirdly ... the EB2 itself is not exempt from all the scrutiny because of Kazarian case and the memo. So we will see EB2 standards toughen too resulting into increased cycle time (which in the long run doesn't help or hurt, but in the short run helps.)

Also i140 trending in the coming months could shed some light on this! Even 10K( I&C) moving from EB1 to EB2 will definitely help the backlogged.

[TeddyKoochu]

Also i140 trending in the coming months could shed some light on this! Even 10K( I&C) moving from EB1 to EB2 will definitely help the backlogged.

That’s exactly my point, all the conservative predictions are indication atleast 20K SOFAD. If we assume that EB2 ROW declines by say 25% based on the Trackitt trend and EB1 declines even by 25% (The Trackitt trend shows a 400% decline - 1/4th) then the SOFAD will be in excess of 30K easily and this will puts the dates into 2007.

[qesehmk]

Teddy, you know i have been a great proponent of trackitt data for predictions. So yes ... it is trending very favorably. But in spirit of our desire to get secondary and tertiary confirmation of the trend ... I would like to see trackitt pending and declines trending up or at least at a higher level compared to 2010.

I am not seeing that yet. Do you?


That’s exactly my point, all the conservative predictions are indication atleast 20K SOFAD. If we assume that EB2 ROW declines by say 25% based on the Trackitt trend and EB1 declines even by 25% (The Trackitt trend shows a 400% decline - 1/4th) then the SOFAD will be in excess of 30K easily and this will puts the dates into 2007.

[veni001]

Teddy, you know i have been a great proponent of trackitt data for predictions. So yes ... it is trending very favorably. But in spirit of our desire to get secondary and tertiary confirmation of the trend ... I would like to see trackitt pending and declines trending up or at least at a higher level compared to 2010.

I am not seeing that yet. Do you?

Teddy and Q,
Assuming that i140 trending will stay the same(flat) in the coming months, we really don't know how many, if any, supposed to be EB1 cases are now being filed in EB2. Also we don't have the labor filing/certified data for the last four months.

So, we really don't have second check to base on:(

[qesehmk]

Veni

Although its hard to quantify EB1 and EB2-ROW separately. Its relatively easier to calculate together. Thats what the second confirmation we calculated a few posts back using i140 data above.


Teddy and Q,
Assuming that i140 trending will stay the same(flat) in the coming months, we really don't know how many, if any, supposed to be EB1 cases are now being filed in EB2. Also we don't have the labor filing/certified data for the last four months.

So, we really don't have second check to base on:(

[veni001]

Veni

Although its hard to quantify EB1 and EB2-ROW separately. Its relatively easier to calculate together. That's what the second confirmation we calculated a few posts back using i140 data above.

Q,
I got that, my point was on EB1(I&C).
EB1 I&C usage increased by 130% in 2010 when compared to 2007. If this goes back to 2006 or 2007 level then we are talking about an additional 7k for the backlogged EB2(I&C), assuming ROW-EB1/2 stay the same.

Note: It's hard to determine just from i140 trending, if EB1(I&C) --> EB2 is actually happening, we can estimate to some extent only if we can get PERM receipt/certified data from DOL similar to i140 data from USCIS.

[angryclubs]

Guys check this out - http://us-non-immigrants.blogspot.com/2011/02/prediction-for-eb2-category-for-fy-2011.html

[qesehmk]

This Guru has been visiting our pages for sure and reproduced what we have been writing into another format. That's good. I know some people have been asking for this kind of tool where they can change the parameters and out comes the SOFAD.

Thanks AC.


Guys check this out - http://us-non-immigrants.blogspot.com/2011/02/prediction-for-eb2-category-for-fy-2011.html

[getgreensoon]

This is my first post. I have been reading qesehmk and teddy for a long time on immigration voice and found this forum in a google search.

If at all the dates move to Jan or Feb 07 for fiscal 2011, do you guys think that USCIS will have to open dates upto at least dec 07 to get more applications for the next year or else waste a lot of visas ? Another way to state the same question may be if dates don't move beyond feb07 by the end of this year, will it be possible that by Dec of 2011 they open at least 6-7 months for taking additional applications ?

[veni001]

This is my first post. I have been reading qesehmk and teddy for a long time on immigration voice and found this forum in a google search.

If at all the dates move to Jan or Feb 07 for fiscal 2011, do you guys think that USCIS will have to open dates upto at least dec 07 to get more applications for the next year or else waste a lot of visas ? Another way to state the same question may be if dates don't move beyond feb07 by the end of this year, will it be possible that by Dec of 2011 they open at least 6-7 months for taking additional applications ?

I don't think so, now USCIS got good handle on i485 ( also i140 ) they will be moving dates based on demand and supply!

[bieber]

I don't think they move dates beyond jul07 this year, if they want to consider new 485s they will have to just make it current for a month and then start the same procedure.

if they move dates to some time in between Jul07 and C, they may have to face law suits

[qesehmk]

Welcome GGS ... and thanks. We have talked about this many times in the past. The common understanding is that it can go eitherway ... but it shouldn't matter to GC aspirants in terms of getting a GC. where it does matter is you get EAD and can switch companies.

If I were to bet, I would say, likely USCIS will move dates significantly forward and take in large number of apps in and then regtrogress dates back. The likelihood of that happening in 2011 is more when they have cleared cases upto may 2007. So likely we may see such large movement in 2012 rather than 11.

p.s. Unless EB1 trends significantly lower this year providing much larger SOFAD.


This is my first post. I have been reading qesehmk and teddy for a long time on immigration voice and found this forum in a google search.

If at all the dates move to Jan or Feb 07 for fiscal 2011, do you guys think that USCIS will have to open dates upto at least dec 07 to get more applications for the next year or else waste a lot of visas ? Another way to state the same question may be if dates don't move beyond feb07 by the end of this year, will it be possible that by Dec of 2011 they open at least 6-7 months for taking additional applications ?

[viypr07]

"angryclubs

Guys check this out - http://us-non-immigrants.blogspot.co...r-fy-2011.html "

Thanks angryclubs for the link. That site also has this link:
http://us-non-immigrants.blogspot.com/2011/01/when-will-i-get-my-green-card-green_20.html

[gcseeker]

I tend to agree with Q's take on this. For many people EAD itself could help a lot in reducing the tension in this wait since they can start utilizing the AC21 portability rules and also feel a little more secure about settling down here. Coming to what would USCIS do, they will probably not dare to declare it current in 2012.If they manage to clear till May 2007 PD by end of 2011 , they might decide to move the date significantly forward to maybe May 2008 by early 2012 and fill the pipeline and then retrogress the dates back to say Oct/Nov 2007.

USCIS learnt a good lesson with their previous fiasco of declaring things to be current . They will not repeat that again. Also money plays a big role in this consideration and with deficit hawks in place on most congressional committe's ,each and every department is supposed to either reduce spending or come up with other novel means of funding themselves.One such patented trick of the USCIS is to move dates forward ,fill the pipeline ...get people to file 485's and then keep on renewing the 485's with long wait times.



Welcome GGS ... and thanks. We have talked about this many times in the past. The common understanding is that it can go eitherway ... but it shouldn't matter to GC aspirants in terms of getting a GC. where it does matter is you get EAD and can switch companies.

If I were to bet, I would say, likely USCIS will move dates significantly forward and take in large number of apps in and then regtrogress dates back. The likelihood of that happening in 2011 is more when they have cleared cases upto may 2007. So likely we may see such large movement in 2012 rather than 11.

p.s. Unless EB1 trends significantly lower this year providing much larger SOFAD.

[happyboy]

Getting EAD will solve almost all the issues as long want to work and able to find a job.
horn your skills to market.

[qesehmk]

In case of EB3 (yes three) .... this is actually true. If you think about it ... if you are going to have a GC only 10 years ... later ....and if you have filed 485, then that is almost as good as having 10 years of stability. You can keep renewing EAD!


Getting EAD will solve almost all the issues as long want to work and able to find a job.
horn your skills to market.

[TeddyKoochu]

"angryclubs

Guys check this out - http://us-non-immigrants.blogspot.co...r-fy-2011.html "

Thanks angryclubs for the link. That site also has this link:
http://us-non-immigrants.blogspot.com/2011/01/when-will-i-get-my-green-card-green_20.html

Friends this link works quite well.

[TeddyKoochu]

In case of EB3 (yes three) .... this is actually true. If you think about it ... if you are going to have a GC only 10 years ... later ....and if you have filed 485, then that is almost as good as having 10 years of stability. You can keep renewing EAD!

Q even for EB2 having EAD is absolutely great, it allows spouses to work and gives much needed stability. For me and Leo007 both of us were so close and yet so far, for now getting EAD is almost like getting GC. For those like me in consulting its like if and only we will get the next extension. Also in the current climate even going home for a vacation is equivalent to inviting trouble at visa stamping and POE.

[TeddyKoochu]

Acknowledgement - Attorney Ron Gotcher
http://www.imminfo.com/News/Newsletter/2010-12/how-bad-india-eb2-backlog.html

Predictions aside he makes a very interesting point about Porting, he is correct in saying that it will saturate in sometime.

[qesehmk]

Teddy

I can feel the pain. You absolutely right ...


Q even for EB2 having EAD is absolutely great, it allows spouses to work and gives much needed stability. For me and Leo007 both of us were so close and yet so far, for now getting EAD is almost like getting GC. For those like me in consulting its like if and only we will get the next extension. Also in the current climate even going home for a vacation is equivalent to inviting trouble at visa stamping and POE.


Acknowledgement - Attorney Ron Gotcher
http://www.imminfo.com/News/Newsletter/2010-12/how-bad-india-eb2-backlog.html

Predictions aside he makes a very interesting point about Porting, he is correct in saying that it will saturate in sometime.

His comments are quite subjective ... But for those in search of hope ... this will resonate. See ... that's what I think we need to avoid. People shouldn't get trapped into false hope. I do think that conversions are not as great. 3K is a reasonable number. 6K is the absolute ceiling. But this year the big negative is that 10K FB is missing. On the plus PERM surge of ROW EB2 is not going to be as strong. And EB1 is going to be the wild card that decides how much EB2 IC gets cleared. So lets keep looking for clues to where EB1 is headed.

[pch053]

I also feel that EB3 -> EB2 porting wont surpass the 6K mark and it's surely not true that almost everybody from EB3 can port to EB2. However I have a feeling that some of Ron Gotcher's comments are sometimes too strong.

On the saturation related to EB3 -> EB2 porting: isn't it expected that there will be a steady flow of EB3 candidates willing to port to EB2 since someone from EB3 category might not be eligible now for EB2 but can attain credentials 1 - 2 years down the line. Maybe we will get a better idea in the next couple of years when we will have data to judge the EB3 -> EB2 porting trend for 2009, 2010 and 2011.

Thanks!

[veni001]

I also feel that EB3 -> EB2 porting wont surpass the 6K mark and it's surely not true that almost everybody from EB3 can port to EB2. However I have a feeling that some of Ron Gotcher's comments are sometimes too strong.

On the saturation related to EB3 -> EB2 porting: isn't it expected that there will be a steady flow of EB3 candidates willing to port to EB2 since someone from EB3 category might not be eligible now for EB2 but can attain credentials 1 - 2 years down the line. Maybe we will get a better idea in the next couple of years when we will have data to judge the EB3 -> EB2 porting trend for 2009, 2010 and 2011.

Thanks!

pch03,
Very good point, not only that like OP(don't remember exactly but said employer got 2000 employees and will start porting most of them), it will not be that easy for same employer or matter of fact even for the new employer to keep on filing for new EB2 positions... here are some thing any employer have to consider before filing new PERM/i140 application..

1. Does the employer have a EB2 job opening(s) to start PERM process in the first place...
2. If answer to Q1 is yes, then once he promote EB3 employee to EB2 position what will happen to the current EB3 position?
3. Employer can not tailor new positions to fit current or future employee.... that means the position he/she is applying PERM (EB1/EB2/EB3) should be well documented
4. How many employees he is considering for porting , $$ for porting also need to show supporting financial(ability to pay)
5. Also on every PERM/i140 application with DOL/USCIS employer need to indicate current number of employees.
6. If the employer is submitting new PERM/i140 for EB2 positions and there is no change in # of employees,or decrease, then that will trigger a red flag at DOL and USCIS...
7. If the employer found guilty/at fault, then he/she will be fined and can not file new PERM cases...

So there should be a break-even point some where which we should be able to find, hopefully, this year based on the trending!

[qesehmk]

Friends,

While we are gathering here to keep track of our GCs... I would like to know if any one of you know any good volunteer-non-profit organizations.

I am wondering if we could start giving visibility to such organizations by listing them here. Sharing information... and who knows one of us may want to go and volunteer some time for society!

This is just an initial idea. Any suggestions for how could we better do this ... are welcome. Feel free to post those suggestions under a thread by the same name.

Best Regards,
Q

[veni001]

Friends,

While we are gathering here to keep track of our GCs... I would like to know if you know if any one of you know any good volunteer-non-profit organizations.

I am wondering if we could start giving visibility to such organizations by listing them here. Sharing information... and who knows one of us may want to go and volunteer some time for society!

This is just an initial idea. Any suggestions for how could we better do this ... are welcome. Feel free to post those suggestions under a thread by the same name.

Best Regards,
Q

That's indeed a very good idea.

[pch053]

I can think of the organization KIVA (http://www.kiva.org/); there main administrative office is in San Francisco though they are spread all over the world. They loan money to individuals/organizations for undertaking any projects or business ventures. The borrower is supposed to pay back the loan in future. People lend money specific to a person/project and can also track the progress, i.e. whether the entire loan has been raised for the project or the person is repaying back the loan, etc. One can see the list of projects that are currently getting funded at http://www.kiva.org/lend. I came to know about this organization a few months back and so far my experience has been positive.

Thanks!

[qesehmk]

Thanks PCH. I will put this in the other section.

Meanwhile.. updated header to simplify understanding with new image and format.


I can think of the organization KIVA (http://www.kiva.org/); there main administrative office is in San Francisco though they are spread all over the world. They loan money to individuals/organizations for undertaking any projects or business ventures. The borrower is supposed to pay back the loan in future. People lend money specific to a person/project and can also track the progress, i.e. whether the entire loan has been raised for the project or the person is repaying back the loan, etc. One can see the list of projects that are currently getting funded at http://www.kiva.org/lend. I came to know about this organization a few months back and so far my experience has been positive.

Thanks!

[leo07]

I used to religiously volunteer for Take Stock in children and currently a member of Red Cross; Eexcept for taking classes, I haven't spent much volunteer time with Red Cross NCA. I can talk to either of them, if you can tell me, what I must "talk" or what information I'd need to proceed further.

It's really a good idea.

[gcseeker]

Teddy

I absolutely agree. Even for EB2 having the EAD itself is a huge step in gaining some stability and freedom from the immense tension of stamping one undergoes every time in the home country.

On the other hand about the question of good NGO's raised by Q , there is one particular organization which is doing a lot to end child abuse in India. It has been featured in many places and the founder also recently won the CNN women of the year award .She has spoken on TED ( by the way if you want to check out inspiring speeches do watch TED for many speakers ) .

http://www.ted.com/speakers/sunitha_krishnan.html

http://www.hinduonnet.com/mp/2009/07/30/stories/2009073050560100.htm

http://www.unodc.org/india/rha_sunitha_krishnan190408.html

The video content is present on the TED website ,the other links are from the hindu newspaper and United nations office.They are a 501(c) organization in the states as well and contributions are tax exempt. Please feel free to move the post to a different section if attention would be diverted.Also the link can bring tears to one's eyes due to some hard hitting reality.

I have a few more Organizations in mind which are genuine ,internationally acclaimed are really doing some good work, do not wish to flood this thread.I will post in the charities thread when that comes up.


Q even for EB2 having EAD is absolutely great, it allows spouses to work and gives much needed stability. For me and Leo007 both of us were so close and yet so far, for now getting EAD is almost like getting GC. For those like me in consulting its like if and only we will get the next extension. Also in the current climate even going home for a vacation is equivalent to inviting trouble at visa stamping and POE.

[qesehmk]

gcseeker

appreciate it. i am really encouraged by posts like yours and leo and veni and others in support of this idea of sharing information about NGOs / 501c's / Non-profit/not-for-profits.

However we certainly do not want those who come lookng for immigration related information to be bombarded with that information unless they want to go out and seek it from that forum. So if you could, PLEASE post it under that particular forum.

Thanks again.


Teddy

I absolutely agree. Even for EB2 having the EAD itself is a huge step in gaining some stability and freedom from the immense tension of stamping one undergoes every time in the home country.

On the other hand about the question of good NGO's raised by Q , there is one particular organization which is doing a lot to end child abuse in India. It has been featured in many places and the founder also recently won the CNN women of the year award .She has spoken on TED ( by the way if you want to check out inspiring speeches do watch TED for many speakers ) .

http://www.ted.com/speakers/sunitha_krishnan.html

http://www.hinduonnet.com/mp/2009/07/30/stories/2009073050560100.htm

http://www.unodc.org/india/rha_sunitha_krishnan190408.html

The video content is present on the TED website ,the other links are from the hindu newspaper and United nations office.They are a 501(c) organization in the states as well and contributions are tax exempt. Please feel free to move the post to a different section if attention would be diverted.Also the link can bring tears to one's eyes due to some hard hitting reality.

I have a few more Organizations in mind which are genuine ,internationally acclaimed are really doing some good work, do not wish to flood this thread.I will post in the charities thread when that comes up.

[TeddyKoochu]

New Demand data is out. Eb2-China's numbers are marginally down which is good. Nothing is expected in the VB for EB2-India.
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf

[alex99]

http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf

[zenmaster]

Pleasantly surprised to find Q's blog on google search :)
I was searching for "immigration reform news" and found this forum :)
How can i not join this forum; I have been a silent admirer of Q, T and many others at iv...
Kudos to all of you for keeping the discussion so healthy and lively !!!

[leo07]

In Demand Data used for Jan 2011 VB: there were 13,125 EB2-I apps prior to 2007( 2006 apps)
In Demand Data used for Mar 2011 VB: there were 13,175 EB2-I apps prior to 2007( 2006 apps)

Not really a good news, but totally not unexpected either.

[qesehmk]

Teddy / Leo agree w both of you. No date movement expected for EB2I. But its not a bad news either. The conversions are just enough to consume annual quota.


New Demand data is out. Eb2-China's numbers are marginally down which is good. Nothing is expected in the VB for EB2-India.
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf


In Demand Data used for Jan 2011 VB: there were 13,125 EB2-I apps prior to 2007( 2006 apps)
In Demand Data used for Mar 2011 VB: there were 13,175 EB2-I apps prior to 2007( 2006 apps)

Not really a good news, but totally not unexpected either.


Alex, Ravi

Thanks for joining us! Welcome. Look forward to your thoughts too.



http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf


Pleasantly surprised to find Q's blog on google search :)
I was searching for "immigration reform news" and found this forum :)
How can i not join this forum; I have been a silent admirer of Q, T and many others at iv...
Kudos to all of you for keeping the discussion so healthy and lively !!!

[TeluguBidda]

In Demand Data used for Jan 2011 VB: there were 13,125 EB2-I apps prior to 2007( 2006 apps)
In Demand Data used for Mar 2011 VB: there were 13,175 EB2-I apps prior to 2007( 2006 apps)

Not really a good news, but totally not unexpected either.

Isn't it actually good news and continue to be good news as long as the pending #s prior to 2007 continue to be around 13,000, until July 1st 2011? Does this # seem to indicate that Porting cases are not in thousands, significant I agree, but definetly not in thousands?

[arorasa]

Isn't it actually good news and continue to be good news as long as the pending #s prior to 2007 continue to be around 13,000, until July 1st 2011? Does this # seem to indicate that Porting cases are not in thousands, significant I agree, but definetly not in thousands?

Since demand went up by 50 and the monthly quota is 250, I assume that 300 porting cases are coming up each month . Which translates to 3600 a year. Q ? Spec? Teddy?:confused:

[qesehmk]

Yes. That's the logical conclusion. There are other reasons (declines / withdrawals / ROW unprocessed cases) why these numbers would change. But everything else being equal ... that's a good logical conclusion.


Since demand went up by 50 and the monthly quota is 250, I assume that 300 porting cases are coming up each month . Which translates to 3600 a year. Q ? Spec? Teddy?:confused:

[leo07]

It would actually be more than that. The cases that are upgraded & approved in these months will not even appear in the demand. They use the Visa number, but do not show up in the demand data necessarily.

[veni001]

Yes. That's the logical conclusion. There are other reasons (declines / withdrawals / ROW unprocessed cases) why these numbers would change. But everything else being equal ... that's a good logical conclusion.

Q,
I think we may not be close to the actual, we know its started as 13,125 in OCT 2010 and then By DEC 2010 it is 13,150 and then JAN 2011 it is back to 13,125 and nor for march it is 13,175.

Let's take this...

1,678 EB2I pending with PD before May 2006 as of 10-01-2010 and then
there are 1,612 EB2I pending with PD before May 2006 as of 01-05-2011

which means a net 66 reduction and Q1 allocation of 7,00 visas - this does not mean 636 ported in Q1? b'se we don't know how many got denied/withdrawn and how many PWMB applied during this period.

[qesehmk]

I agree w you and that's why I said the logic is correct "DIRECTIONALLY".


Q,
I think we may not be close to the actual, we know its started as 13,125 in OCT 2010 and then By DEC 2010 it is 13,150 and then JAN 2011 it is back to 13,125 and nor for march it is 13,175.

Let's take this...

1,678 EB2I pending with PD before May 2006 as of 10-01-2010 and then
there are 1,612 EB2I pending with PD before May 2006 as of 01-05-2011

which means a net 66 reduction and Q1 allocation of 7,00 visas - this does not mean 636 ported in Q1? b'se we don't know how many got denied/withdrawn and how many PWMB applied during this period.

[whereismygclost]

Firstly, thank your Q,Teddy,Spectator and others for their detailed analysis and keeping the hopes of many of us eb2-I alive. Really appreciate it.Been following your post for a while now.Based on the current demand data published does it mean that the EB3-EB2 porting is less than expected?

[veni001]

Firstly, thank your Q,Teddy,Spectator and others for their detailed analysis and keeping the hopes of many of us eb2-I alive. Really appreciate it.Been following your post for a while now.Based on the current demand data published does it mean that the EB3-EB2 porting is less than expected?

Could be as long as the demand data, month to month, will not have significant jumps.

[pch053]

I would also be interested to see if we can shed any light on the #'s of EB3->EB2 porting during the last quarter and extrapolate it for the year. I think Q assumed 6,000 EB3 -> EB2 porting while predicitng EB2-I movement and that's probably more of an upper bound, i.e. it's very unlikely that EB3->EB2 porting will exceed 6,000 for the year. I saw in trackitt where people are predicting the EB3->EB2 porting #'s to be as high as 10K - 25K (25K sounded ridiculous anyway), though I don't feel the porting will be anywhere near that range. Can we get any idea on the EB3->EB2 porting based on the change/reduction in EB3-I pending cases? This might be difficult as the local office and consular processing cases are probably not listed in the inventory that we all see.

[TeluguBidda]

I would also be interested to see if we can shed any light on the #'s of EB3->EB2 porting during the last quarter and extrapolate it for the year. I think Q assumed 6,000 EB3 -> EB2 porting while predicitng EB2-I movement and that's probably more of an upper bound, i.e. it's very unlikely that EB3->EB2 porting will exceed 6,000 for the year. I saw in trackitt where people are predicting the EB3->EB2 porting #'s to be as high as 10K - 25K (25K sounded ridiculous anyway), though I don't feel the porting will be anywhere near that range. Can we get any idea on the EB3->EB2 porting based on the change/reduction in EB3-I pending cases? This might be difficult as the local office and consular processing cases are probably not listed in the inventory that we all see.

People are known to express their personal feelings without any sort of concrete evidence or believable guidance. Also, there are too many people indulging in poor taste of the language, spitting verbal venom on each other. To summarize, except for this Blog / website, I have not seen any "reasonable" guidance elsewhere.

Bottomline, nobody knows real magnitude of porting although we can be cautiously optimistic that it is exaggerated in other websites. 5000 seems to be a reasonable number.

[qesehmk]

Earlier I had assumed 6K porting. But now I am more towards 3-4K. I think 15-25K porting talk is not worthy of paying any attn whatsoever. Stay cool... Spec Teddy also think this number is 3-4K.

p.s. - If you didn't see it, couple of pages back I listed an alternative method to deduce SOFAD this year. Check it out.... because it gives you an idea of pure SOFAD i.e. the one that actually will reduce backlog. (in other words it doesn't matter there how much conversions happen).

[soggadu]

Q and others...Newbbie here... have been following the blog for some time... I believe come last quarter of 2011, EB2 C and I should make same progress cut off dates wise ( though C has less numbers pending ). With current scenario do you think of a possibility where CIS move the dates to end of 2007 to accommodate EB2 C too?

[leo07]

you mean $ 15-25K?

EB1 holds the key if it drops by 22-25% from last year, most of us will be through:)


I think 15-25K porting talk is not worthy of paying any attn whatsoever.

[leo07]

Hi Soggadu, ( Shobhan babu?)

I do not think DOS will/must care if C has less/more pending numbers over all. Spilled over visas are strictly allocated on PD. Whoever has the oldest PD in EB2 gets the nod. When there are no others in EB2 with that PD, they move to the next date and the same loop goes on. So, this is the reason for dates for EB2-IC moving together during the spill over season.

Now, as a thumb-rule, we can take for granted that EB2-I will at the least catch up with EB2C cut-off date come July. So, more the EB2C moves now, the better for EB2-I in SOFAD season :)




Q and others...Newbbie here... have been following the blog for some time... I believe come last quarter of 2011, EB2 C and I should make same progress cut off dates wise ( though C has less numbers pending ). With current scenario do you think of a possibility where CIS move the dates to end of 2007 to accommodate EB2 C too?

[qesehmk]

I was talking about 15-25K conversions from EB3->2 NOT being realistic.

Agree w you about EB1. 20-25% drop in EB1 would mean dates moving to April-May 2007.


you mean $ 15-25K?

EB1 holds the key if it drops by 22-25% from last year, most of us will be through:)

Soggadu, welcome to forum. I think Leo already answered your question above.

[immitrickz]

Hi Soggadu, ( Shobhan babu?)

I do not think DOS will/must care if C has less/more pending numbers over all. Spilled over visas are strictly allocated on PD. Whoever has the oldest PD in EB2 gets the nod. When there are no others in EB2 with that PD, they move to the next date and the same loop goes on. So, this is the reason for dates for EB2-IC moving together during the spill over season.

Now, as a thumb-rule, we can take for granted that EB2-I will at the least catch up with EB2C cut-off date come July. So, more the EB2C moves now, the better for EB2-I in SOFAD season :)

Hi..I have been following this blog for quite some time. It's time for me to chime in :-).
I think even EB2C guys need to worry about EB3 -> EB2 porting going by Leo's comment.

[pch053]

EB3->EB2 porting will affect EB2C movement but they might be affected to a somewhat lesser extent than EB2I. When the spillover season starts at first EB2I will move to the current PDs of EB2C. Assuming there are still more visas left (which I hope), EB2I and EB2C will move together from then onwards till the end of the yearly cycle. So, if there are more porting cases, the movement of EB2I & EB2C (after the PD of EB2I is at par with EB2C) will be less. Please correct me if I am wrong in my understanding.

Thanks!

[veni001]

Hi..I have been following this blog for quite some time. It's time for me to chime in :-).
I think even EB2C guys need to worry about EB3 -> EB2 porting going by Leo's comment.

Welcome!

That's not correct, EB3C got only 4,150 pending with PD before Aug 2007 compared to almost 11,000 EB2C for the same period. Unless there are more PWMB and/or CP cases EB3C should clear until Aug 2007 by Sept 20112.

[leo07]

veni001,

immitrickz was talking abut EB2C. EB2C need to worry a little, but only b/n JUL-SEP season, because that's when the sharing occurs. Since their EB2 backlog is less, their exposure to risk(EB3-EB2 porting) is obviously limited.

Best!



Welcome!

That's not correct, EB3C got only 4,150 pending with PD before Aug 2007 compared to almost 11,000 EB2C for the same period. Unless there are more PWMB and/or CP cases EB3C should clear until Aug 2007 by Sept 20112.

[qesehmk]

Venni .. EB2IC dates will move together when SOFAD kicks in. To move dates to Aug 2007 SOFAD needs to be 30-35K right? Do you think SOFAD will be that high?


Welcome!

That's not correct, EB3C got only 4,150 pending with PD before Aug 2007 compared to almost 11,000 EB2C for the same period. Unless there are more PWMB and/or CP cases EB3C should clear until Aug 2007 by Sept 20112.



veni001,

immitrickz was talking abut EB2C. EB2C need to worry a little, but only b/n JUL-SEP season, because that's when the sharing occurs. Since their EB2 backlog is less, their exposure to risk(EB3-EB2 porting) is obviously limited.

Best!

Leo just to clarify your point : there are two kinds of risks to EB2C.
1) Less SOFAD due to overall conversions. This risk stays same for EB2C as EB2I as both share the SOFAD.
2) Less date movement because of EB3C->EB2C conversions. This risk is quite less given not many EB3C exist (much less compared to India).

Now #1 really overshadows any risk in #2. So even if 2 were high ... it only delays EB2C approvals within a year.
Bottomline EB2C is unaffected (or at most affected teh same as EB2I).

[leo07]

Q, I agree there is more than 1 risk. I did not split the risk on country basis for simplicity.Because if there were EB3C porting, that will affect EB2I just as much as EB3I porting affects EB2C.( ah..did I get all my 2's,3's, I's and C's correct :)))

oh, I think veni001 was talking about EB3C? "EB3C should clear until Aug 2007 by Sept 20112."

Venni .. EB2IC dates will move together when SOFAD kicks in. To move dates to Aug 2007 SOFAD needs to be 30-35K right? Do you think SOFAD will be that high?






Leo just to clarify your point : there are two kinds of risks to EB2C.
1) Less SOFAD due to overall conversions. This risk stays same for EB2C as EB2I as both share the SOFAD.
2) Less date movement because of EB3C-EB2I conversions. This risk is quite less given not many EB3C exist (much less compared to India).

Now #1 really overshadows any risk in #2. So even if 2 were high ... it only delays EB2C approvals within a year.
Bottomline EB2C is unaffected (or at most affected teh same as EB2I).

[qesehmk]

oh, I think veni001 was talking about EB3C? "EB3C should clear until Aug 2007 by Sept 20112."

My bad! I misread it as EB2C.

Regarding EB3C ... there is 4K demand through Aug 2007 w no chance of Spillover. Plus they have 6-7K CP demand ... its unclear how much is pre aug 2007. But considering that ... it looks diffficult for all cases of EB3C to clear by Sep 2011. But Sep 2012 its a certainty.

[Spectator]

My bad! I misread it as EB2C.

Regarding EB3C ... there is 4K demand through Aug 2007 w no chance of Spillover. Plus they have 6-7K CP demand ... its unclear how much is pre aug 2007. But considering that ... it looks diffficult for all cases of EB3C to clear by Sep 2011. But Sep 2012 its a certainty.

As Q rightly points out, EB3-C has a very large CP demand, so even 2,803 visas a year might not be enough anyway.

One thing to remember.

No Country can have a Cut Off Date later than that established for ROW.

I don't think EB3-ROW can reach Aug-07 within 2 years.

In that case, EB3-C would share the same Cut Off Date as EB3-ROW, even if that means they can't receive the full 7% allocation.

[veni001]

Venni .. EB2IC dates will move together when SOFAD kicks in. To move dates to Aug 2007 SOFAD needs to be 30-35K right? Do you think SOFAD will be that high?

Leo just to clarify your point : there are two kinds of risks to EB2C.
1) Less SOFAD due to overall conversions. This risk stays same for EB2C as EB2I as both share the SOFAD.
2) Less date movement because of EB3C->EB2C conversions. This risk is quite less given not many EB3C exist (much less compared to India).

Now #1 really overshadows any risk in #2. So even if 2 were high ... it only delays EB2C approvals within a year.
Bottomline EB2C is unaffected (or at most affected teh same as EB2I).


Agreed,
Even 3k SOFAD to EB2C for FY2011&Fy2012 will clear them up to Aug 2007, means EB2I need to get to AUG2007 also! Yes EB3I-->EB2I will hurt them by not letting them take the bigger share from SOFAD pie!

At some point(looking at 2007-10 PERM approvals), may be FY2014, EB2C may not get any share from SOFAD at all:rolleyes:, all will be absorbed by EB2I backlog to catchup with EB2C.

[qesehmk]

Very wise observation Spec. Kudos to you!!

If somebody didn't understand what Spec said here ... a simple way to put this is:

The moment a country ceases to have demand less than 7% in a year, it ceases to be retrogressed country. And then everything becomes a pure PD play. (So effectively that country joins ROW).

On the other hand when a country's demand exceeds 7% it splits from ROW and becomes a retrogressed country. E.g. Dominic Republic has become one in FB category.

p.s. - S. Korea however beats me since it continues to exceed 7% yet is part of ROW. Wonder if cross-category (FB / EB) limits have anything to do w it.



No Country can have a Cut Off Date later than that established for ROW.
...
In that case, EB3-C would share the same Cut Off Date as EB3-ROW, even if that means they can't receive the full 7% allocation.

[Spectator]

p.s. - S. Korea however beats me since it continues to exceed 7% yet is part of ROW. Wonder if cross-category (FB / EB) limits have anything to do w it.Q,

See FAQ Post #8

[mygctracker]

hi Q,

I may be naive, to ask this question, but figured to ask.

VB has been showing 08 May'2006 since Sept 2010. Suppose next month (before spillover), If it advances any further now, Does this mean:

a) Almost everyone with a PD before 08 May'2006 have been allotted a Visa number? (And CIS is looking to accept more applications to fulfill the monthly #)

b) Can a applicant with PD of Jan 2007 assume that, his token# would be called after applicants with PD of May,June,July,Aug,Sept,Oct,Nov,Dec?

If this understanding is incorrect, can you please let me know how to understand the number of applicants before a Priority Date?

Thanks.

[admin]

Spec,

Thanks. I know that fact. However although visa bulletin says so, its not true that S Korea received extra visas from unused FB visas. They receive it from ROW SPILLOVER within category. And I think this is not so legal since SPILLOVER has to be applied according to PD. USCIS explanation is that S Korea doesn't have as much FB demand so they can get these visas from EB.

Now if we accept what tehy say then it means that S Korea is getting EB visas at the expense of IC because of wrong application of 7% limit.


Q,

See FAQ Post #8


hi Q,

I may be naive, to ask this question, but figured to ask.

VB has been showing 08 May'2006 since Sept 2010. Suppose next month (before spillover), If it advances any further now, Does this mean:

a) Almost everyone with a PD before 08 May'2006 have been allotted a Visa number? (And CIS is looking to accept more applications to fulfill the monthly #)

b) Can a applicant with PD of Jan 2007 assume that, his token# would be called after applicants with PD of May,June,July,Aug,Sept,Oct,Nov,Dec?

If this understanding is incorrect, can you please let me know how to understand the number of applicants before a Priority Date?

Thanks.

MyGCTracker, dates are advanced when DoS senses that there is no sufficient demand to fulfil monthly max quota. It may not mean that everybody prior to the current date has received visa (since some cases may have open issues) and some may be in processing. The demand here represents ONLY those cases that are ready to be assigned a visa. Usually yes, cases with earlier PDs will be approved earlier (as long as they are in same category and chargeability). However there could be some timelag since not everything is computerized and it won't be unusual to finding A getting GC earlier than B even though A has a PD later than B. But in my opinion that lag shouldn't be more than 2-3 months MAX. Otherwise it is safe to assume that the case has some issues.

The 485 inventory is a good indicator of how many applicants are before a certain date. Of course there are some ifs and buts. But overall its a great indicator.

[whistleblower]

Well I am not against EB3 to EB2 porting and I think it is fair enuf if you get qualified in few years to attain EB2 job, you should upgrade your case. But what really bothers me is PERM processing time of 3-4 days. When unemployment is so high and American citizen is not getting job, how can DOL overlook this fact and blindly approve cases without auditing them and verifying if it is legitimate. The whole reason behind this is DOL Internal Memo which suggested to it's employee. I think it mentioned something like "why would you audit so many PERMS and not approve them straight away?" (I am trying to locate it in on internet. If someone has link please share it here) . Not only this is unfair to US citizen but also to immigrants like me who was roped into PERM audit for years. These days every tom, dick and harry can get his PERM approved under EB2 without even being getting fully scrutinized from DOL.

I recently come across Senator Grassley's website --> http://grassley.senate.gov/contact.cfm , where I am gonna post this question "How come when unemployment is still at 9.5 %, everyday month thousands of Green Card PERM are getting approved in 5 days that too without even getting audited?"

Senator Grassley's site mentions

Contact Senator Grassley

Senator Grassley has an office in Washington, DC, and six offices in Iowa to serve constituents.

For whistleblowers interested in establishing communication with Senator Grassley regarding wrongdoing within federal agencies or misuse of public dollars please click here (whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>).

I would request others also to bring this to Senator Grassley's attention under his whistleblower section.


Firstly, thank your Q,Teddy,Spectator and others for their detailed analysis and keeping the hopes of many of us eb2-I alive. Really appreciate it.Been following your post for a while now.Based on the current demand data published does it mean that the EB3-EB2 porting is less than expected?

[veni001]

Well I am not against EB3 to EB2 porting and I think it is fair enuf if you get qualified in few years to attain EB2 job, you should upgrade your case. But what really bothers me is PERM processing time of 3-4 days. When unemployment is so high and American citizen is not getting job, how can DOL overlook this fact and blindly approve cases without auditing them and verifying if it is legitimate. The whole reason behind this is DOL Internal Memo which suggested to it's employee. I think it mentioned something like "why would you audit so many PERMS and not approve them straight away?" (I am trying to locate it in on internet. If someone has link please share it here) . Not only this is unfair to US citizen but also to immigrants like me who was roped into PERM audit for years. These days every tom, dick and harry can get his PERM approved under EB2 without even being getting fully scrutinized from DOL.

I recently come across Senator Grassley's website --> http://grassley.senate.gov/contact.cfm , where I am gonna post this question "How come when unemployment is still at 9.5 %, everyday month thousands of Green Card PERM are getting approved in 5 days that too without even getting audited?"

Senator Grassley's site mentions

Contact Senator Grassley

Senator Grassley has an office in Washington, DC, and six offices in Iowa to serve constituents.

For whistleblowers interested in establishing communication with Senator Grassley regarding wrongdoing within federal agencies or misuse of public dollars please click here (whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>).

I would request others also to bring this to Senator Grassley's attention under his whistleblower section.

Good Luck!

[nuvikas]

Whistleblower, I do not understand what you are trying to say? Are you saying that since you had to wait a long time in PERM audit, others should also be made to wait and remain stuck in Perm audit? How is this helpful to you and others? If some one got PERM approved in a short duration does it amount to fraud automatically?

[Spectator]

Spec,

Thanks. I know that fact. However although visa bulletin says so, its not true that S Korea received extra visas from unused FB visas. They receive it from ROW SPILLOVER within category. And I think this is not so legal since SPILLOVER has to be applied according to PD. USCIS explanation is that S Korea doesn't have as much FB demand so they can get these visas from EB.

Now if we accept what tehy say then it means that S Korea is getting EB visas at the expense of IC because of wrong application of 7% limit. That's not quite correct either.

I agree that there is no actual transfer of additional Visa numbers from FB, otherwise EB3 should consume more than the 28.6% allocation.

It is not correct to say that SK gets them from ROW Spillover at the expense of China and India.

SK are just not deemed to have exceeded the overall 7% limit (25,620 this year) and can therefore consume more of the ROW allocation than they otherwise would be allowed to. This is also potentially true in EB1 and EB2.

The extra visas are consumed at the expense of other Countries within ROW. This just adds insult to EB3-ROW because Mexico and Philippines also take Visa numbers from ROW.

There is no question of China and India's 7% limit being reduced, as can be seen from the FY2010 Statistics, where both received and exceeded the 7% limit. So it is wrong to say

it means that S Korea is getting EB visas at the expense of IC because of wrong application of 7% limit.

Currently, there is no Fall Across in EB3, since ROW is also retrogressed, so no spare visas are available to 7% limited Countries.

Given their continuing high Visa usage in EB, it does not seem quite right that SK is not also limited to 7% and shown separately to ROW.

[Spectator]

Well I am not against EB3 to EB2 porting and I think it is fair enuf if you get qualified in few years to attain EB2 job, you should upgrade your case. But what really bothers me is PERM processing time of 3-4 days. When unemployment is so high and American citizen is not getting job, how can DOL overlook this fact and blindly approve cases without auditing them and verifying if it is legitimate. The whole reason behind this is DOL Internal Memo which suggested to it's employee. I think it mentioned something like "why would you audit so many PERMS and not approve them straight away?" (I am trying to locate it in on internet. If someone has link please share it here) . Not only this is unfair to US citizen but also to immigrants like me who was roped into PERM audit for years. These days every tom, dick and harry can get his PERM approved under EB2 without even being getting fully scrutinized from DOL.

I recently come across Senator Grassley's website --> http://grassley.senate.gov/contact.cfm , where I am gonna post this question "How come when unemployment is still at 9.5 %, everyday month thousands of Green Card PERM are getting approved in 5 days that too without even getting audited?"

Senator Grassley's site mentions

Contact Senator Grassley

Senator Grassley has an office in Washington, DC, and six offices in Iowa to serve constituents.

For whistleblowers interested in establishing communication with Senator Grassley regarding wrongdoing within federal agencies or misuse of public dollars please click here (whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>).

I would request others also to bring this to Senator Grassley's attention under his whistleblower section.I do sympathize with your situation. It is totally unacceptable for audits and appeals to take so long.

I would suggest not getting into bed with the devil, just because there is a particular aspect of the system you are unhappy with.

Everybody has different aspects they don't like. If everybody contacts Grassley with their pet hate, then pretty soon the EB Immigration system will be closed down, or at least the bar will become so high that NOBODY can qualify. He certainly has no interest in helping YOU.

Grassley would just love that. He hates Immigration.

It is better to focus on ensuring that DOL becomes more efficient at processing Audits and Appeals and contact the Congressman or Senator relevant to that aim.

There are a couple of interesting threads on ImmInfo Help Grassley kill legal immigration (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/immigration-policy-54/help-grassley-kill-legal-immigration-13188/) and Article regarding EB2 India (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/visa-quota-and-cutoff-date-issues-66/article-regarding-eb2-india-12841/index2.html)

[qesehmk]

Spec glad you agree that there is no actual transfer and interpretation of 7% should make SK separate from ROW. And that's what I feel and thats why I said SK receives those numbers at the expense of IC not in the sense of 7% allocation but in terms of loss of SOFAD.

If the following quote came from visa bulletin, I would be amazed because this is a clear lie.


The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.

Clearly the Family numbers were NOT distributed to allow S Korea to go over the limit. That puts question mark on the whole process of 7% rule and its application.

USCIS' interpretation of 7% limit also isn't consistent. Two examples:
1) In 2010 why didn't EB2I get the benefit when FB2I almost became current last year? 2) Why do we see small countries have significant EB or FB backlog? If 26K combined limit were applied then we should NEVER ever see any demand backlogged for smaller countries like Nepal, Guatemala etc. except unless there is audit or other issues.

I think SK applicants are getting undue benefit of USCIS' haphazzard interpretation of 7% rule.

The 7% rule itself is injustice since it discriminates people based on nationality. But since that is part of law, its tough to challenge (not impossible). But then the USCIS interpretation of 7% rule and the false explanation is injustice.



That's not quite correct either.

I agree that there is no actual transfer of Visa numbers from FB, otherwise EB3 should consume more than the 28.6% allocation.

It is not correct to say that SK gets them from ROW Spillover at the expense of China and India.

SK are just not deemed to have exceeded the overall 7% limit (25,620 this year) and can therefore consume more of the ROW allocation than they otherwise would be allowed to. This is also potentially true in EB1 and EB2.

The extra visas are consumed at the expense of other Countries within ROW. This just adds insult to EB3-ROW because Mexico and Philippines also take Visa numbers from ROW.

There is no question of China and India's 7% limit being reduced, as can be seen from the FY2010 Statistics, where both received and exceeded the 7% limit. So it is wrong to say


Currently, there is no Fall Across in EB3, since ROW is also retrogressed, so no spare visas are available to 7% limited Countries.

Given their continuing high Visa usage in EB, it does not seem quite right that SK is not also limited to 7% and shown separately to ROW.

[qesehmk]

whistleblower, i agree w multiple folks here. Howsoever unfortunate your situation may be, (and mind you almost everybody on this forum will have a story to tell), we shouldn't complain against other immigrants because there already is ample anti-immigrant sentiment running around.

[Spectator]

Answers in-line


Spec glad you agree that there is no actual transfer and interpretation of 7% should make SK separate from ROW. And that's what I feel and thats why I said SK receives those numbers at the expense of IC not in the sense of 7% allocation but in terms of loss of SOFAD.

If the following quote came from visa bulletin, I would be amazed because this is a clear lie.

Check for yourself http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_4747.html I agree it isn't very well explained.

Clearly the Family numbers were NOT distributed to allow S Korea to go over the limit. That puts question mark on the whole process of 7% rule and its application.

I wouldn't go that far. The unused numbers in FB are allowed to be counted for 7% purposes in EB. The important fact is that SK never exceeds the combined FB & EB allowance. Personally, I think the 7% limit should be enforced at EB level.

USCIS' interpretation of 7% limit also isn't consistent. Two examples:
1) In 2010 why didn't EB2I get the benefit when FB2I almost became current last year?

Because the law first allows unused Visas unused by FB2I to fall down to FB3I and FB4I if necessary. From the VB:

Third: Married Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400, plus any numbers not required by first and second preferences.

Fourth: Brothers and Sisters of Adult Citizens: 65,000, plus any numbers not required by first three preferences.
In addition, FB India used 16,022 visas in FB in FY2010, which is already more than the maximum number of 15,820 allowed as 7% of 226,000.

2) Why do we see small countries have significant EB or FB backlog? If 26K combined limit were applied then we should NEVER ever see any demand backlogged for smaller countries like Nepal, Guatemala etc. except unless there is audit or other issues.

That would be true if the 100 odd Countries that make up ROW were treated individually. They are not. Only Countries identified as going to use more than the 7% limit are treated individually. The rest are aggregated as ROW and all those Countries fight by PD for the Visas available. I am sure many Countries with relatively little Demand would love to be treated separately, since they would either be Current or have a Cut Off Date far in advance of other Countries within ROW.

I think SK applicants are getting undue benefit of USCIS' haphazzard interpretation of 7% rule.

I wouldn't necessarily call it haphazard. It follows the law as written. I do think certain aspects of it are unfair and that SK get an undue advantage. However, that still pales in comparison to the advantage taken by Mexico and Philippines, especially as it impacts EB3.

[qesehmk]

My answers in red.




#1 - The unused numbers in FB are allowed to be counted for 7% purposes in EB.
But that's not what the bulletin said. And even if so, that interpretation itself is fishy.

#2 - Because the law first allows unused Visas unused by FB2I to fall down to FB3I and FB4I if necessary. From the VB:
I know that theoretical process. If they actually followed it, then all of FB would've to be current before they can commit anything to EB. Wouldn't they? Besides 7% is not entitled quota as per the visa bulletin. So USCIS shouldn't look at it that way while trying to balance quota across EB and FB.

#3 - That would be true if the 100 odd Countries that make up ROW were treated individually. They are not. Only Countries identified as going to use more than the 7% limit are treated individually. The rest are aggregated as ROW and all those Countries fight by PD for the Visas available. I am sure many Countries with relatively little Demand would love to be treated separately, since they would either be Current or have a Cut Off Date far in advance of other Countries within ROW.
What's so special about SK? I think there are tons of small countries that could be eligible for the same treatment as SK.


I think SK applicants are getting undue benefit of USCIS' haphazzard interpretation of 7% rule.

#4 - I wouldn't necessarily call it haphazard. It follows the law as written. I do think certain aspects of it are unfair and that SK get an undue advantage. However, that still pales in comparison to the advantage taken by Mexico and Philippines, especially as it impacts EB3.
Because of #2/3 explanation above, I call teh interpretation haphazard. M&P are no different than India/China. So if MP get advantage then so do IC. Right?

[kd2008]

Cases below are all categories regular+premium
USCIS Received Date Applications Filed RFEs Cases Approved Cases Denied % Approved Average Approval Time
February 2011 7 0 0 0 0% N/A
January 2011 77 5 17 0 22% 8 days
December 2010 89 7 28 0 31% 17 days
November 2010 118 9 45 0 38% 24 days
October 2010 121 9 48 0 40% 28 days
September 2010 149 15 77 0 52% 1.8 months
August 2010 191 23 106 1 55% 1.9 months
July 2010 195 23 122 1 63% 2.5 months
June 2010 203 32 153 3 75% 3 months
May 2010 179 25 148 2 83% 2.7 months
April 2010 202 34 173 2 86% 1.9 months
March 2010 162 23 147 1 91% 1.3 months
February 2010 130 24 115 1 88% 1.5 months
January 2010 106 13 94 2 89% 1.6 months

[getgreensoon]

Saw this posting on the Fragomen website:

PERM Processing

DOL has updated its estimated processing times for PERM applications. As of February 4, 2011, DOL was processing non-audited PERM cases that were filed in February 2011, audited cases that were filed in January 2009 and appeals that were filed in June 2008. Government error appeal cases are current.

Agency officials also reported on approval rates for labor certification applications that have been placed into supervised recruitment. Approximately 65% of these cases are denied, 23% are withdrawn by the employer, and just 12% are approved.

[leo07]

@kd2008
Thanks for the data . I'd be curious to run a regression on PERM approvals with a lag( 1 - 12 months). That could throw some light on the trend for next 6 months.

[qesehmk]

KD thanks. This forum software is not quite rfiendly when posting tables. Can u pls post as jpg to understand better. Also a question - whats teh sourec of the data.


Cases below are all categories regular+premium
USCIS Received Date Applications Filed RFEs Cases Approved Cases Denied % Approved Average Approval Time
February 2011 7 0 0 0 0% N/A
January 2011 77 5 17 0 22% 8 days
December 2010 89 7 28 0 31% 17 days
November 2010 118 9 45 0 38% 24 days
October 2010 121 9 48 0 40% 28 days
September 2010 149 15 77 0 52% 1.8 months
August 2010 191 23 106 1 55% 1.9 months
July 2010 195 23 122 1 63% 2.5 months
June 2010 203 32 153 3 75% 3 months
May 2010 179 25 148 2 83% 2.7 months
April 2010 202 34 173 2 86% 1.9 months
March 2010 162 23 147 1 91% 1.3 months
February 2010 130 24 115 1 88% 1.5 months
January 2010 106 13 94 2 89% 1.6 months

GGS, this is good. What is supervised recruitment. Is that not required for all PERM applications?


Saw this posting on the Fragomen website:

PERM Processing

DOL has updated its estimated processing times for PERM applications. As of February 4, 2011, DOL was processing non-audited PERM cases that were filed in February 2011, audited cases that were filed in January 2009 and appeals that were filed in June 2008. Government error appeal cases are current.

Agency officials also reported on approval rates for labor certification applications that have been placed into supervised recruitment. Approximately 65% of these cases are denied, 23% are withdrawn by the employer, and just 12% are approved.

[veni001]

KD thanks. This forum software is not quite rfiendly when posting tables. Can u pls post as jpg to understand better. Also a question - whats teh sourec of the data.

GGS, this is good. What is supervised recruitment. Is that not required for all PERM applications?

Q,
When the certifying officer suspects the employer did not follow appropriate recruitment efforts then they will notify employer to go through DOL supervised recruitment process (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/faqsanswers.cfm#recrep1).

Especially in tough times, DOL has to do its best to safeguard jobs for American Citizens/GC holders first.

“Supervised Recruitment is one of many tools the Department of Labor uses to safeguard the integrity of the permanent labor certification process and protect job opportunities for American workers,” said Solicitor of Labor Gregory F. Jacob.

DOL estimates that Supervised Recruitment will add at least 180 days to PERM processing!

[kd2008]

Q, the source is trackitt - its in the title of my post. I prefer posting it this way coz then one can then copy and paste in it in excel sheet easily.

[qesehmk]

Thanks veni. This is useful. So in other words .... it will not only slow down the process but will also reduce approval rate (12%!!).


Q,
When the certifying officer suspects the employer did not follow appropriate recruitment efforts then they will notify employer to go through DOL supervised recruitment process (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/faqsanswers.cfm#recrep1).

Especially in tough times, DOL has to do its best to safeguard jobs for American Citizens/GC holders first.

“Supervised Recruitment is one of many tools the Department of Labor uses to safeguard the integrity of the permanent labor certification process and protect job opportunities for American workers,” said Solicitor of Labor Gregory F. Jacob.

DOL estimates that Supervised Recruitment will add at least 180 days to PERM processing!


Q, the source is trackitt - its in the title of my post. I prefer posting it this way coz then one can then copy and paste in it in excel sheet easily.

That's ok KD. Its just hard to understand and a problem is that then all blanks are omitted and numbers appear in columns that they do not belong to - rendering the data inaccurate.

As per 140 trend, the inventory is increasing indicating delay in approving.

[Spectator]

M&P are no different than India/China. So if MP get advantage then so do IC. Right?
IC are different to MP.

MP receive extra Visa numbers in EB3 because the usage of EB Visas by MP in all other EB Categories is low. They can receive a large amount in EB3 and still fall under the overall 7% limit of 9,800 (based on 140,000 EB visas).

IC cannot benefit in the same way, because they use the full quota in other EB Categories, in particular in EB1 and EB2. If IC used very few visas in EB1 & EB2, then IC could benefit in the same way as MP.

I suspect it is not possible for other individual Countries, since they are aggregated into a group called ROW and the rules therefore apply to the Group. I am not certain of that, however.

[srinivasj]

Hello,
I have a question..how come all of a sudden the predictions of EB2-I became pessimistic(oct-o6) to optimistic( feb or mar-07) over last 2-3 weeks..
are we estimating more EB1 spillover than we thought of or estimating low EB3-EB2 porting..
Regards..

[alex99]

March VB OUT Guys
http://travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5337.html

[veni001]

Summary compared to FEB 2011 Bulletin,

EB2I- No change
EB3I - Three week forward movement

EB2C - One week forward movement
EB3ROW - 3 months forward movement

March 2011 Bulletin (http://travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5337.html) Link

[getgreensoon]

Summary compared to FEB 2011 Bulletin,

EB2I- No change
EB3I - Retrogressed by three weeks

EB2C - Retrogressed by One week
EB3ROW - 3 months forward movement

March 2011 Bulletin (http://travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5337.html) Link

EB2 China moved forward by one week

[veni001]

EB2 China moved forward by one week

Good catch, i overlooked, Why would EB2C retrogress:( my bad.

[qesehmk]

You make an excellent point here. Agreed.


IC are different to MP.

MP receive extra Visa numbers in EB3 because the usage of EB Visas by MP in all other EB Categories is low. They can receive a large amount in EB3 and still fall under the overall 7% limit of 9,800 (based on 140,000 EB visas).

IC cannot benefit in the same way, because they use the full quota in other EB Categories, in particular in EB1 and EB2. If IC used very few visas in EB1 & EB2, then IC could benefit in the same way as MP.

I suspect it is not possible for other individual Countries, since they are aggregated into a group called ROW and the rules therefore apply to the Group. I am not certain of that, however.


Hello,
I have a question..how come all of a sudden the predictions of EB2-I became pessimistic(oct-o6) to optimistic( feb or mar-07) over last 2-3 weeks..
are we estimating more EB1 spillover than we thought of or estimating low EB3-EB2 porting..
Regards..
Not sure what you arereferring to. Head of the thread talks about Nov 2006.

[qesehmk]

Thanks. No surprises again.
Good news is EB2C moved ahead 1 week (not retro veni!). This move indicates that there is little to none porting in EB3C which probably means ROW also shouldn't have any porting.


Summary compared to FEB 2011 Bulletin,

EB2I- No change
EB3I - Retrogressed by three weeks

EB2C - Retrogressed by One week
EB3ROW - 3 months forward movement

March 2011 Bulletin (http://travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5337.html) Link

[veni001]

Thanks. No surprises again.
Good news is EB2C moved ahead 1 week (not retro veni!). This move indicates that there is little to none porting in EB3C which probably means ROW also shouldn't have any porting.

Agreed,
May have very little, which shouldn't be a big factor anyway!

[qesehmk]

guys we reached 50K views today. Its a small milestone but still that's significant. I hope this thread continues to be as useful as it has been previously. Please don't hesitate to express your views or questions.

[veni001]

guys we reached 50K views today. Its a small milestone but still that's significant. I hope this thread continues to be as useful as it has been previously. Please don't hesitate to express your views or questions.

Q,
Great, Congratulations.

[whistleblower]

Well this is my point. When PERM is audited and goes into supervised recruitment by DOL (In supervised recruitment, DOL official conducts recruitment for the employer), approval rate is 12 %. See the difference in approval rate. I am not saying that all PERM should be audited. But approving PERM in 4-5 days, do you think they are even getting fair scrutiny? When PERM was taking 7-8 months, at least you would think it was getting it's fair share of attention. Some one would argue that DOL was taking so long because they were backlogged. This is B.S, when economy was terrible in 2008-2009, there were hardly any PERMs filed. This could be inferred from I-485 ROW inventory for these years.

If you will go into trackitt and see PERM tracker, there is hardly anyone who is filing in EB3. So are we saying that all these PERM with EB2 requirements legitimate. There is no way this is true. Even if percentage of this is true, it is difficult for me to believe there are no U.S Citizens eligible for these jobs. 73,000 PERMs in 2010 when there is 9.5% unemployment!!!

If most of the people over here think PERM approvals within 3-4 days is alright, well it is upto them to take a backseat and let things happen how it is happening right now. I feel this is not alright and I would like to bring it to someone's attention. I am sick of people recommending others on forum to upgrade cases because it will only take 4 days for PERM, 15 days for I-140 and 4 months for I-485. Getting GC in 5 months is a joke. There is difference between EB3 and EB2 requirements, people receiving GC in EB2 should be one who deserves it. Its pity that people on forums are now suggesting getting online Masters to be qualified for EB2. Online Masters, are you kidding me?


Saw this posting on the Fragomen website:

PERM Processing

DOL has updated its estimated processing times for PERM applications. As of February 4, 2011, DOL was processing non-audited PERM cases that were filed in February 2011, audited cases that were filed in January 2009 and appeals that were filed in June 2008. Government error appeal cases are current.

Agency officials also reported on approval rates for labor certification applications that have been placed into supervised recruitment. Approximately 65% of these cases are denied, 23% are withdrawn by the employer, and just 12% are approved.


Q, Spec. I totally agree that Senator Grassley is not proponent of legal immigration. But to me what's wrong is wrong. I would like to stand up for it. if this would end legal immigration, well that's good. Everyone can get out of this rat's race and move on. I do not want to end up as one of those who just have a story to share. I have an option and I will like to pursue that. It is upto an individual to take or leave this option. Everyone has their own opinion.


I do sympathize with your situation. It is totally unacceptable for audits and appeals to take so long.

I would suggest not getting into bed with the devil, just because there is a particular aspect of the system you are unhappy with.

Everybody has different aspects they don't like. If everybody contacts Grassley with their pet hate, then pretty soon the EB Immigration system will be closed down, or at least the bar will become so high that NOBODY can qualify. He certainly has no interest in helping YOU.

Grassley would just love that. He hates Immigration.

It is better to focus on ensuring that DOL becomes more efficient at processing Audits and Appeals and contact the Congressman or Senator relevant to that aim.

There are a couple of interesting threads on ImmInfo Help Grassley kill legal immigration (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/immigration-policy-54/help-grassley-kill-legal-immigration-13188/) and Article regarding EB2 India (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/visa-quota-and-cutoff-date-issues-66/article-regarding-eb2-india-12841/index2.html)

[MorningSun]

Dear Whistleblower: There are things in life that are worth fighting for and there are things in life that are not. I don't see a problem with faster adjudication of PERM filings, for that matter even obtaining an online degree in order to qualify for EB2. There is nothing illegal about it.

"73,000 PERMs in 2010 when there is 9.5% unemployment"
This statement is not accurate. First of 9.5% unemployment is not a valid figure. Second, total unemployment is different from unemployment in "highly skilled" area.

"Getting GC in 5 months is a joke."
I would like to point out that these people in EB3 have been waiting for years, I ask you what is wrong with them porting to EB2. Nothing illegal. Picture this, I am in EB2 row now, if I happen to qualify for EB1 due to my "exceptional research" in the field of "enjoying time with my family and feeling happy with what I have"; I will apply under EB1. I am sure you would agree.

"I feel this is not alright and I would like to bring it to someone's attention."
If you would like to put in the effort, then seek something that will bring relief to maximum number of applicants.

"Spillover" is the best event that happened to EB2, I hope there will be more in the near future.

[qesehmk]

WB, first and foremost, everybody has a right to say their mind. So do you.

I think differently on this topic. I think the question of whether there are enough americans to do the job is a bit subjective. At some level I feel if that criteria were applied in its letter then there would hardly be 1000 jobs all across US that will satisfy it. I think that lawmakers always intended to keep it broad enough to mean that the labor market in a certain area is having difficulty identifying such labor. In other words it means they didn't want business to bear extraordinary costs in incurring such labor (not that such labor didn't exist). Now yes that sounds unfair to American citizens and yes at some level it is. However, as immigrants EB3s have every right to demonstrate that they fall into EB2 or as H1 a person has every right to try for his GC. I would never try to suspect another person's efforts simply because there are proper agencies that have that mandate and there is tremendous anti-immigrant sentiment running around. Enough said on this subject from my side now.


.....
If you will go into trackitt and see PERM tracker, there is hardly anyone who is filing in EB3. So are we saying that all these PERM with EB2 requirements legitimate. There is no way this is true. Even if percentage of this is true, it is difficult for me to believe there are no U.S Citizens eligible for these jobs. 73,000 PERMs in 2010 when there is 9.5% unemployment!!!

....

Q, Spec. I totally agree that Senator Grassley is not proponent of legal immigration. But to me what's wrong is wrong. I would like to stand up for it. if this would end legal immigration, well that's good. Everyone can get out of this rat's race and move on. I do not want to end up as one of those who just have a story to share. I have an option and I will like to pursue that. It is upto an individual to take or leave this option. Everyone has their own opinion.


.....

Picture this, I am in EB2 row now, if I happen to qualify for EB1 due to my "exceptional research" in the field of "enjoying time with my family and feeling happy with what I have"; I will apply under EB1. I am sure you would agree.
....


MorningSun you are hilarious!

[pch053]

I do agree that this is one of the best discussion groups I have seen, especially for discussing the movement of EB2I/C. I am somewhat disappointed with trackitt while following the discussion threads on the above topic with people making random estimates (either positive or negative) defying any logic and without any understanding of the situation. Thanks for starting this extremely helpful blog for all immigrants.

[qesehmk]

Gokulram Thanks. Welcome.

PCH, in Sanskrit language there is a saying.. that even Gods love praise... We are just mortals! So thanks for the kind words!


Q - this is a great blog and probably the most sensible one on the web, that I've seen as far as using detailed analysis to arrive at predictions. Keep it up. Look forward to hearing your views more and hopefully, I contribute too.


I do agree that this is one of the best discussion groups I have seen, especially for discussing the movement of EB2I/C. I am somewhat disappointed with trackitt while following the discussion threads on the above topic with people making random estimates (either positive or negative) defying any logic and without any understanding of the situation. Thanks for starting this extremely helpful blog for all immigrants.

[TeluguBidda]

I do agree that this is one of the best discussion groups I have seen, especially for discussing the movement of EB2I/C. I am somewhat disappointed with trackitt while following the discussion threads on the above topic with people making random estimates (either positive or negative) defying any logic and without any understanding of the situation. Thanks for starting this extremely helpful blog for all immigrants.

Not to mention, we have to go through acerbic comments from few people. I used to visit Trackitt regularly, simply not anymore.

[kd2008]

Please see the link here: http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/quarterlydata.cfm

Beginning October 1, 2010 (FY 2011), OFLC is posting cumulative quarterly case disclosure data covering the permanent and temporary labor certification programs as well as the new prevailing wage program.

9299 Certified India
1004 Certified China
8052 Certified ROW
18355 Certified Total

in just three months!
This puts an end to ROW demand debate. Its coming and its huge!

[veni001]

Please see the link here: http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/quarterlydata.cfm

Beginning October 1, 2010 (FY 2011), OFLC is posting cumulative quarterly case disclosure data covering the permanent and temporary labor certification programs as well as the new prevailing wage program.

9299 Certified India
1004 Certified China
8052 Certified ROW
18355 Certified Total

in just three months!
This puts an end to ROW demand debate. Its coming and its huge!

KD2008,
Thanks for the link, actually the numbers are in the same ballpark when compared to FY 2010 PERM data which means about 25K EB2ROW demand!

FY 2010 PERM Data(Certified)
Total - 70,237
INDIA- 28,930
CHINA - 4,052
MEX- 3,306
PHIL - 3,305
ROW - 30,644

As we have been discussing for some time now EB1 demand is going to be Key for this year's SOFAD.

[qesehmk]

KD

Thanks. Very useful info. This is a bit disappointing but not much. Even with same approvals as last year there will be reasonable SOFAD (19K or so). But I will wait at least until Q2 data is published since Q1 is likely to have momentum from 2010 PERM APPROVAL SURGE. At the end of 2010 the PERM backlog still had quite a few cases unapproved.

Secondly, even if we don't see much PERM reduction in 2010, its not going to hurt a lot. What will hurt more is SYA i.e. same year approvals.

p.s. - On another note, I have come to the conclusion that ROW 485/labor ratio is around 1.4 rather than 2.2 for EB2I. Historically since 2004 350K ROW PERM were approved and 500K GCs were issued for ROW.


Please see the link here: http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/quarterlydata.cfm

Beginning October 1, 2010 (FY 2011), OFLC is posting cumulative quarterly case disclosure data covering the permanent and temporary labor certification programs as well as the new prevailing wage program.

9299 Certified India
1004 Certified China
8052 Certified ROW
18355 Certified Total

in just three months!
This puts an end to ROW demand debate. Its coming and its huge!

[Spectator]

A few more statistics.

Outcome – Number ---- %
Certified 18,355 -- 78.93%
Denied --- 4,171 -- 17.94%
Withdrawn -- 729 --- 3.13%
Total --- 23,255 - 100.00%

CERTIFIED CASES
Applied - Number ---- %
FY2011 -- 6,979 -- 38.02%
FY2010 -- 9,004 -- 49.05%
FY2009 -- 1,048 --- 5.71%
FY2008 -- 1,298 --- 7.07%
FY2007 ----- 24 --- 0.13%
FY2006 ------ 1 --- 0.01%
FY2005 ------ 1 --- 0.01%
Total -- 18,355 - 100.00%

Applied = Receipt Date of PERM Application by DOL.

COUNTRY --- Number ---- %
China ------ 1,004 --- 5.47%
India ------ 9,299 -- 50.66%
Mexico ------- 710 --- 3.87%
Philippines –- 746 --- 4.06%
ROW -------- 6,596 -- 35.94%
Total ----- 18,355 - 100.00%

ROW+M+P ---- 8,052 -- 43.87%

[qesehmk]

Spec,

If the decision date was between Oct-Dec 2010 then where r you getting this information from..... see below..


A few more statistics.



CERTIFIED CASES
PD ---- Number ---- %
FY2011 - 6,979 -- 38.02%
FY2010 - 9,004 -- 49.05%
FY2009 - 1,048 --- 5.71%
FY2008 - 1,298 --- 7.07%
FY2007 ---- 24 --- 0.13%
FY2006 ----- 1 --- 0.01%
FY2005 ----- 1 --- 0.01%
Total - 18,355 - 100.00%

[haripathhi]

Spec,

This might be a basic qs for many, however, what does PD stand for? Priority Date / Porting Date?


A few more statistics.

Outcome – Number ---- %
Certified 18,355 -- 78.93%
Denied --- 4,171 -- 17.94%
Withdrawn -- 729 --- 3.13%
Total --- 23,255 - 100.00%

CERTIFIED CASES
PD ---- Number ---- %
FY2011 - 6,979 -- 38.02%
FY2010 - 9,004 -- 49.05%
FY2009 - 1,048 --- 5.71%
FY2008 - 1,298 --- 7.07%
FY2007 ---- 24 --- 0.13%
FY2006 ----- 1 --- 0.01%
FY2005 ----- 1 --- 0.01%
Total - 18,355 - 100.00%

COUNTRY --- Number ---- %
China ------ 1,004 --- 5.47%
India ------ 9,299 -- 50.66%
Mexico ------- 710 --- 3.87%
Philippines –- 746 --- 4.06%
ROW -------- 6,596 -- 35.94%
Total ----- 18,355 - 100.00%

ROW+M+P ---- 8,052 -- 43.87%

[dec_01_2006]

Are these EB-2 #'s or consolidated figures for all EB categories.


A few more statistics.

Outcome – Number ---- %
Certified 18,355 -- 78.93%
Denied --- 4,171 -- 17.94%
Withdrawn -- 729 --- 3.13%
Total --- 23,255 - 100.00%

CERTIFIED CASES
PD ---- Number ---- %
FY2011 - 6,979 -- 38.02%
FY2010 - 9,004 -- 49.05%
FY2009 - 1,048 --- 5.71%
FY2008 - 1,298 --- 7.07%
FY2007 ---- 24 --- 0.13%
FY2006 ----- 1 --- 0.01%
FY2005 ----- 1 --- 0.01%
Total - 18,355 - 100.00%

COUNTRY --- Number ---- %
China ------ 1,004 --- 5.47%
India ------ 9,299 -- 50.66%
Mexico ------- 710 --- 3.87%
Philippines –- 746 --- 4.06%
ROW -------- 6,596 -- 35.94%
Total ----- 18,355 - 100.00%

ROW+M+P ---- 8,052 -- 43.87%

[Spectator]

Spec,

If the decision date was between Oct-Dec 2010 then where r you getting this information from..... see below..The Case No. Contains the Julian No of the Application Date.

eg A-10322-32895 shows the Application Date was the 322nd day of 2010 or 11/18/2010.

From the data, the most noticeable figure was the rise in Indian certifications. Prorated for the whole year, they would represent an extra 8k.

Porting obviously has some thing to do with this, but it is not possible to say how much. Of course, the increased rate might not be sustained throughout the rest of the year. I therefore treat it as interesting rather than definitive.

[Spectator]

Spec,

This might be a basic qs for many, however, what does PD stand for? Priority Date / Porting Date?It is Priority Date, or more correctly the date the application was Received by DOL.

I will change the description. Application Date was too long.

[Spectator]

Are these EB-2 #'s or consolidated figures for all EB categories.They are for all EB categories.

There is no definitive means to distinguish EB2 from EB3 cases. You must make that judgement.

[qesehmk]

There are 6-7K cases that you are showing belong to 2011. That doesnt makse sense. How can decision date be in 2010 and PD in 2011?

NEVER MIND. I think you meant USCIS 2011 year. Right?


The Case No. Contains the Julian No of the Application Date.

eg A-10322-32895 shows the Application Date was the 322nd day of 2010 or 18/11/2010.

From the data, the most noticeable figure was the rise in Indian certifications. Prorated for the whole year, they would represent an extra 8k.

Porting obviously has some thing to do with this, but it is not possible to say how much. Of course, the increased rate might not be sustained throughout the rest of the year. I therefore treat it as interesting rather than definitive.

[Spectator]

There are 6-7K cases that you are showing belong to 2011. That doesnt makse sense. How can decision date be in 2010 and PD in 2011?Because FY2011 started on October 01, 2010! All the Decisions are in FY2011. Therefore it is perfectly feasible for a Certification to have both been Received and Adjudicated in FY2011.

For example, case A-10322-32895 was Received by DOL on 11/18/2010, which is in FY2011. It was adjudicated on 12/01/2010 and therefore took 13 days to be approved.

[qesehmk]

Yes I realized that you meant USCIS FY after I posted that comment. Thanks.

I think the statistics you posted on approvals by FY is quite interesting. In Q1 2011 only 7K were approved. At full year that would mean 28K same year approvals. We can add 10K to it for any prior years plus the 18K already approved in Q1 2011. That brings full year PERM approvals in 2011 at 56K as opposed to 70K plus in 2010. That's full 20% reduction YoY in PERM approvals. So overall that's a good story. KD pls take a note. No need to worry.


Because FY2011 started on October 01, 2010! All the Decisions are in FY2011. Therefore it is perfectly feasible for a Certification to have both been Received and Adjudicated in FY2011.

For example, case A-10322-32895 was Received by DOL on 11/18/2010, which is in FY2011. It was adjudicated on 12/01/2010 and therefore took 13 days to be approved.

[kd2008]

Q, 20% is a good thing. But seriously I expect the drop to be more drastic then that.

[qesehmk]

So you are a convert now :-)

I think the best case scenario is a 40% drop.


Q, 20% is a good thing. But seriously I expect the drop to be more drastic then that.

[leo07]

if PERM drops by 40% and EB1 by 20% then we will be in Aug 2007?

[Spectator]

Yes I realized that you meant USCIS FY after I posted that comment. Thanks.

I think the statistics you posted on approvals by FY is quite interesting. In Q1 2011 only 7K were approved. At full year that would mean 28K same year approvals. We can add 10K to it for any prior years plus the 18K already approved in Q1 2011. That brings full year PERM approvals in 2011 at 56K as opposed to 70K plus in 2010. That's full 20% reduction YoY in PERM approvals. So overall that's a good story. KD pls take a note. No need to worry.I don't entirely buy that logic.

Clearly, the beginning of FY2011 wasn't quite as Current as we thought, judging by the fact that nearly half the approvals related to the previous FY.

Full Year approvals are probably heading for slightly higher than 70k this year IMO - maybe.

Last year, around 75% of approvals in Q1 were for the previous FY year cases, compared to 49% this year.

That eventually turned round and 75% of the approvals in later quarters were for current FY submissions.

We only know how many current year PERMS were certified in Q1 - we don't know how many are pending because the previous year applications needed to be addressed.

Around 10-12% of cases approved appear to be appearing from Audit and Appeal - much the same as last year.

I think it is better to reserve judgement on the matter until we see what happens in the Q2 period.

If the Current Year approval numbers are still relatively low, then it probably says overall approvals will be low.

If they increase, as they did last year, then we might be heading for a similar number to last year.

[qesehmk]

This logic would make sense if 2010 were no extraordinary year. But 2010 was when PERM backlog was signficantly cleared. That clearance sale has been going right until now. It has to come to end sometime.

In Q1 2010 that sale clearly had barely begun and even if so they had prior years to approve before they approved 2010. That's what the % story is that you described. Ironically your facts are right but conclusion is (IMO) wrong.

Another way to verify my thesis is to look at PERM approval turn around. For 7K cases in 2011 the turnaround is less than 3 months!! Whereas it was much higher in 2010. Right. That tells you that backlog will continue to be cleared while new demand is trickling in (as opposed to flooding in).


I don't entirely buy that logic.

Clearly, the beginning of FY2011 wasn't quite as Current as we thought, judging by the fact that nearly half the approvals related to the previous FY.

Full Year approvals are probably heading for slightly higher than 70k this year IMO - maybe.

Last year, around 75% of approvals in Q1 were for the previous FY year cases, compared to 49% this year.

That eventually turned round and 75% of the approvals in later quarters were for current FY submissions.

We only know how many current year PERMS were certified in Q1 - we don't know how many are pending because the previous year applications needed to be addressed.

Around 10-12% of cases approved appear to be appearing from Audit and Appeal - much the same as last year.

I think it is better to reserve judgement on the matter until we see what happens in the Q2 period.

If the Current Year approval numbers are still relatively low, then it probably says overall approvals will be low.

If they increase, as they did last year, then we might be heading for a similar number to last year.


if PERM drops by 40% and EB1 by 20% then we will be in Aug 2007? Yey!

[Spectator]

This logic would make sense if 2010 were no extraordinary year. But 2010 was when PERM backlog was signficantly cleared. That clearance sale has been going right until now. It has to come to end sometime.

In Q1 2010 that sale clearly had barely begun and even if so they had prior years to approve before they approved 2010. That's what the % story is that you described. Ironically your facts are right but conclusion is (IMO) wrong.

Another way to verify my thesis is to look at PERM approval turn around. For 7K cases in 2011 the turnaround is less than 3 months!! Whereas it was much higher in 2010. Right. That tells you that backlog will continue to be cleared while new demand is trickling in (as opposed to flooding in).So please explain why 49% of approvals relate to FY2010.

That is a much higher figure than I would have expected, had the situation been as Current as we thought. It is only 25% less than a period when we knew there was a huge backlog to clear.

With such short PERM approval times, the numbers remaining from the previous FY should have been quite small and they weren't - unless you consider 49% to be a small number.

[bieber]

ever since the unemployment rate hit 10% and stayed little below there, companies and DOL started detailed queries (which makes complete sense, nothing wrong). eventhough last month report shows 9% it was because the total workforce went down and not because of new hirings.

Having said that, a well documented Real labor for EB2 has low chances of denial because the unemployment was not huge in such areas, EB3 ICRow may be in the same boat but that is not relevant for this dicussion

[qesehmk]

You see 2010 numbers because clearly DoL continues to work through the backlog and has not finished yet. (Of course the definition of backlog is not days but months and years worth inventory. Otherwise there will always be some backlog!).

So teh question is how does 49% look compared to 75% prior year? It certainly looks great since that's 33% reduction (not 25%). I think that's significant. Secondly the question is - is 33% good enough. I think the answer depends on when is one's individual PD!

Second proof of what I am saying is that the PERM turnaround time is shortened. All that matters is for new applications it is shortened. For old applications it may very well be high. But that's water under the bridge. The trend of backlog reduction is favorable. The trend of new app turnaround time is favorable. These two together indicate that PERM backlog is being worked through and new applications don't stay longer in the pool. If the pool was accumulating new applications then turn around times can't be where they are now.

49% is not a small number. But 3 months of turnaround (and in some cases as small as 4-5 days!) is a very small number. And that tells a big story.


So please explain why 49% of approvals relate to FY2010.

That is a much higher figure than I would have expected, had the situation been as Current as we thought. It is only 25% less than a period when we knew there was a huge backlog to clear.

With such short PERM approval times, the numbers remaining from the previous FY should have been quite small and they weren't - unless you consider 49% to be a small number.

[Spectator]

Out of interest, here is the Approval Profile for FY2010.

FY2010 - Total ---- %
Q1 ---- 11,798 -- 16.80%
Q2 ---- 23,156 -- 32.97%
Q3 ---- 20,169 -- 28.72%
Q4 ---- 15,114 -- 21.52%
Total - 70,237 - 100.00%

Interestingly, the lowest number of approvals were in Q1.

Contrast 11,798 in Q1 FY2010 with 18,355 in Q1 FY2011. I'm not saying it necessarily means anything.

I think we will just have to agree to disagree on what the Q1 figures say and wait for the Q2 figures.

[qesehmk]

This also quite well supports what I am trying to say.

First the firesale kicked off in Q2 (I have my own reasons why ...but that's besides the point) which is why Q1 approvals in 2010 were relatively less. In 2011 its opposite, most likely the firesale was in its last stage in Q1 2011 since we saw significant 2010 yet significant 2011 approvals with surprising levels of approval turn around.

Secondly as far as prior year goes since the sale had not yet started .... one would obviously expect more % approvals from prior year especially in Q1. Which is exactly what happened. What the approvals do not tell you is how much is still unapproved. That story can ONLY be inferred by turnaround time.

The turnaround reduction is as follows....(BASED ON Q1 2011 approvals).
FY Turnaround Time (For Decision) in Days
2008 875
2009 776
2010 121
2011 67




Out of interest, here is the Approval Profile for FY2010.

FY2010 - Total ---- %
Q1 ---- 11,798 -- 16.80%
Q2 ---- 23,156 -- 32.97%
Q3 ---- 20,169 -- 28.72%
Q4 ---- 15,114 -- 21.52%
Total - 70,237 - 100.00%

Interestingly, the lowest number of approvals were in Q1.

Contrast 11,798 in Q1 FY2010 with 18,355 in Q1 FY2011. I'm not saying it necessarily means anything.

I think we will just have to agree to disagree on what the Q1 figures say and wait for the Q2 figures.

[bieber]

Spec and Q

I don't know if it adds anything to your conversation, I checked the Q1 2010 approvals and none of the 11798 approvals had 2009 priority date forget about just Q1-2010.

This year atleast 33% approvals are from Q1 same fiscal

[bieber]

sorry i made a mistake, I just looked for Chicago not Atlanta, ignore my last post,

roughly there are about 5000 cases from 2009 that are approved in Q1 Fy2010

[veni001]

This also quite well supports what I am trying to say.

First the firesale kicked off in Q2 (I have my own reasons why ...but that's besides the point) which is why Q1 approvals in 2010 were relatively less. In 2011 its opposite, most likely the firesale was in its last stage in Q1 2011 since we saw significant 2010 yet significant 2011 approvals with surprising levels of approval turn around.

Secondly as far as prior year goes since the sale had not yet started .... one would obviously expect more % approvals from prior year especially in Q1. Which is exactly what happened. What the approvals do not tell you is how much is still unapproved. That story can ONLY be inferred by turnaround time.

The turnaround reduction is as follows....
FY Turnaround Time (For Decision) in Days
2008 875
2009 776
2010 121
2011 67

Q, Spec,
Can we guess how many EB2/EB3 based on PW wage level?
I see 2/3 of the certified cases are in wage Level1& Level 2, 1/3 of the certified cases in wage Level3&Level 4. I see the same trend in FY 2010 data!:confused:

Also FY 2011 Q1 ROW PERM approvals are about 21.5% when compared to total FY 2010 ROW PERM approval! I am not sure if this is going to have the same trending as FY 2010!

[qesehmk]

Bieber
Thats ok. You should be looking at 09 and prior. That's what matter because it tells you how big a story backlog was then.


sorry i made a mistake, I just looked for Chicago not Atlanta, ignore my last post,

roughly there are about 5000 cases from 2009 that are approved in Q1 Fy2010


Q, Spec,
Can we guess how many EB2/EB3 based on PW wage level?
I see 2/3 of the certified cases are in wage Level1& Level 2, 1/3 of the certified cases in wage Level3&Level 4. I see the same trend in FY 2010 data!:confused:

Also FY 2011 Q1 ROW PERM approvals are about 21.5% when compared to total FY 2010 ROW PERM approval! I am not sure if this is going to have the same trending as FY 2010!
Veni, both are good observations. I can't guess about wage level for now.

But regarding the other observation (ROW composition), that's an interesting one. The labor composition sohuldnt change unless somebody is intervening and trying to push some cases vs others. I will leave it at that.

[Spectator]

Just adding to the statistics.

This is a like for like comparison of Q1 Approvals in FY2010 & FY2011.

CERTIFIED CASES FY2010
Received – Total ---- %
FY2010 ------- 6 --- 0.05%
FY2009 -- 10,190 -- 86.37%
FY2008 --- 1,286 -- 10.90%
FY2007 ----- 299 --- 2.53%
FY2006 ------ 16 --- 0.14%
FY2005 ------- 1 --- 0.01%
Total --- 11,798 - 100.00%

CERTIFIED CASES FY2011
Received - Number ---- %
FY2011 --- 6,979 -- 38.02%
FY2010 --- 9,004 -- 49.05%
FY2009 --- 1,048 --- 5.71%
FY2008 --- 1,298 --- 7.07%
FY2007 ------ 24 --- 0.13%
FY2006 ------- 1 --- 0.01%
FY2005 ------- 1 --- 0.01%
Total --- 18,355 - 100.00%

[Spectator]

Q, Spec,
Can we guess how many EB2/EB3 based on PW wage level?
I see 2/3 of the certified cases are in wage Level1& Level 2, 1/3 of the certified cases in wage Level3&Level 4. I see the same trend in FY 2010 data!:confused:

Also FY 2011 Q1 ROW PERM approvals are about 21.5% when compared to total FY 2010 ROW PERM approval! I am not sure if this is going to have the same trending as FY 2010!It's a good idea.

I think it has to be more than just the level (possibly level & wage?). I have seen a previous discussion where it was proposed and an EB2 person said they were Level 1 for their (SOC Code is it?).

[cool189]

It looks like the turn-around rate for PERMs is reducing. Does this mean the amount of spill over will reduce for EB2-IC in 2011?


Just adding to the statistics.

This is a like for like comparison of Q1 Approvals in FY2010 & FY2011.

CERTIFIED CASES FY2010
Received – Total ---- %
FY2010 ------- 6 --- 0.05%
FY2009 -- 10,190 -- 86.37%
FY2008 --- 1,286 -- 10.90%
FY2007 ----- 299 --- 2.53%
FY2006 ------ 16 --- 0.14%
FY2005 ------- 1 --- 0.01%
Total --- 11,798 - 100.00%

CERTIFIED CASES FY2011
Received - Number ---- %
FY2011 --- 6,979 -- 38.02%
FY2010 --- 9,004 -- 49.05%
FY2009 --- 1,048 --- 5.71%
FY2008 --- 1,298 --- 7.07%
FY2007 ------ 24 --- 0.13%
FY2006 ------- 1 --- 0.01%
FY2005 ------- 1 --- 0.01%
Total --- 18,355 - 100.00%

[Spectator]

Like for like by Country for FY2010 & FY2011 Q1 PERM Approvals.

Country -------- Q1 FY2011 ----- ---- Q1 FY2010 --
China ------- 1,004 --- 5.47% ------ 764 --- 6.48%
India ------- 9,299 -- 50.66% ---- 4,530 -- 38.40%
Mexico -------- 710 --- 3.87% ------ 563 --- 4.77%
Philippines --- 746 --- 4.06% ------ 578 --- 4.90%
ROW --------- 6,596 -- 35.94% ---- 5,363 -- 45.46%
Total ------ 18,355 - 100.00% --- 11,798 - 100.00%

ROW + M + P - 8,052 -- 43.87% ---- 6,504 -- 55.13%

[veni001]

It's a good idea.

I think it has to be more than just the level (possibly level & wage?). I have seen a previous discussion where it was proposed and an EB2 person said they were Level 1 for their (SOC Code is it?).

Spec,
Since we have only about 8K cases(including M&P) for ROW it is probably a good idea to look in depth and see how many could actually fall into EB2? I have been hearing/seeing posts that if the job is IT related then SOC job zone should be 5(off-course wage) to be eligible for EB2?

[veni001]

It looks like the turn-around rate for PERMs is reducing. Does this mean the amount of spill over will reduce for EB2-IC in 2011?

Not necessarily, SOFAD depends on EB1/EB2 ROW demand. There are more IND PERM approvals than ROW in Q1 FY 2011 when compared to Q1 FY 2010 or when compared to the entire year. PERM approval does not always mean i140 filing/approval.

[veni001]

Like for like by Country for FY2010 & FY2011 Q1 PERM Approvals.

Country -------- Q1 FY2011 ----- ---- Q1 FY2010 --
China ------- 1,004 --- 5.47% ------ 764 --- 6.48%
India ------- 9,299 -- 50.66% ---- 4,530 -- 38.40%
Mexico -------- 710 --- 3.87% ------ 563 --- 4.77%
Philippines --- 746 --- 4.06% ------ 578 --- 4.90%
ROW --------- 6,596 -- 35.94% ---- 5,363 -- 45.46%
Total ------ 18,355 - 100.00% --- 11,798 - 100.00%

ROW + M + P - 8,052 -- 43.87% ---- 6,504 -- 55.13%

Spec,
Out of which 5,361(57.6%) are in IT sector out of which 3,044 (56.7%) are in wage levels 1&2. Something we may be able to use towards Porting calculations?

[Spectator]

Spec,
Out of which 5,361(57.6%) are in IT sector out of which 3,044 (56.7%) are in wage levels 1&2. Something we may be able to use towards Porting calculations?Veni,

I'm not sure.

For me at least, I only think we can say that there are probably quite a lot of Porting applications that have been Certified in Q1.

Beyond that, we can't say much.

For instance, we can't determine the original PD in EB3, so we don't know whether they are what I call "Effective" Porting numbers.

That is that the original PD is a date that the Cut Off Date will reach this FY. Some of the Certifications must be for PDs that will be reached in future FYs. There is still a huge advantage to getting an EB2 Certification, even if it is not Current immediately, or in this FY.

[soggadu]

Does all these calculations mean more spillover for EB2I/C this year? My pd is Oct 22 2007, i would need around 25K to get current .... keeping my fingers crossed... :confused::confused::confused:

[Spectator]

Does all these calculations mean more spillover for EB2I/C this year? My pd is Oct 22 2007, i would need around 25K to get current .... keeping my fingers crossed... :confused::confused::confused:I hope you mean Oct 22, 2006.

SOFAD would have to be considerably higher than 25k for Cut Off Dates to move to October 22, 2007 for both India and China.

[bhayzone]

Hello folks, this is my first post here and I'm really glad to have come across this forum. The discussions on all the other forums related to immigration have degraded so much that, getting any real information is like looking for a needle in a haystack. I hope this forum remains as rich in content as it has been started with.

Now, getting to work. I did some number crunching to get a rough idea of how many EB1 and EB2 ROW PERMs were certified in 2010. I apologize if someone has already done this crunching and this seems like a double post.

Steps to arrive at the number of EB1 and EB2 ROW PERMs in 2010
Used data from the 2010 PERM certification text file (http://www.flcdatacenter.com/CasePerm.aspx).
FILTER Denied, Widthdrawn & POTENTIAL EB3 (wage < 50k)
1) Total - 81413.
2) Subtract "Denied" & "Widthdrawn" - Total remaining 70239
3) Removed all PERMS with wage < 50k - Total remaining 53997

Remaining are all EB1 or EB2.
Assuming, everyone above 100k wage => EB1
Total EB1 = 13340

All the remaining are EB2. Out of those,
EB2 ROW (non I/C) = 16402
EB2 I = 21515
EB2 C = 2744

So we potentially have 13340 EB1's and 16402 EB2 ROW PERMS approved in 2010. I know that this analysis is riddled with assumptions. But I believe that my assumptions represent the worst possible case e.g EB1 is wage>100k and EB3 is wage<50k.

The one thing that bothers me about the 2010 data is that it contains PERMS that were certified in 2009 too (maybe due to them being certified-expired).

So does anyone believe that, come July-Aug, EB2 I/C will receive huge spillover? Am I missing things here?

[soggadu]

I hope you mean Oct 22, 2006.

SOFAD would have to be considerably higher than 25k for Cut Off Dates to move to October 22, 2007 for both India and China.

Yes > 25K spillover... my pd is oct 22 2007... Still hoping i will get a chance to file EAD this year...

[kd2008]

Hello folks, this is my first post here and I'm really glad to have come across this forum. The discussions on all the other forums related to immigration have degraded so much that, getting any real information is like looking for a needle in a haystack. I hope this forum remains as rich in content as it has been started with.

Now, getting to work. I did some number crunching to get a rough idea of how many EB1 and EB2 ROW PERMs were certified in 2010. I apologize if someone has already done this crunching and this seems like a double post.

Steps to arrive at the number of EB1 and EB2 ROW PERMs in 2010
Used data from the 2010 PERM certification text file (http://www.flcdatacenter.com/CasePerm.aspx).
FILTER Denied, Widthdrawn & POTENTIAL EB3 (wage < 50k)
1) Total - 81413.
2) Subtract "Denied" & "Widthdrawn" - Total remaining 70239
3) Removed all PERMS with wage < 50k - Total remaining 53997

Remaining are all EB1 or EB2.
Assuming, everyone above 100k wage => EB1
Total EB1 = 13340

All the remaining are EB2. Out of those,
EB2 ROW (non I/C) = 16402
EB2 I = 21515
EB2 C = 2744

So we potentially have 13340 EB1's and 16402 EB2 ROW PERMS approved in 2010. I know that this analysis is riddled with assumptions. But I believe that my assumptions represent the worst possible case e.g EB1 is wage>100k and EB3 is wage<50k.

The one thing that bothers me about the 2010 data is that it contains PERMS that were certified in 2009 too (maybe due to them being certified-expired).

So does anyone believe that, come July-Aug, EB2 I/C will receive huge spillover? Am I missing things here?

Welcome to the forum.
Eb1 does not require PERM. Only Eb2 and Eb3 require it. So your calculations need to be redone. Moreover, wages have nothing to do with Eb2 or Eb3, its the job requirements - do they need MS or BS+5 etc. This info is not available in the PERM database. Wage may be a weak correlating aspect but its not a discerning aspect. Hence the folks on forum look at trackitt data, historical data etc.

[veni001]

Welcome to the forum.
Eb1 does not require PERM. Only Eb2 and Eb3 require it. So your calculations need to be redone. Moreover, wages have nothing to do with Eb2 or Eb3, its the job requirements - do they need MS or BS+5 etc. This info is not available in the PERM database. Wage may be a weak correlating aspect but its not a discerning aspect. Hence the folks on forum look at trackitt data, historical data etc.

Kd2008,
That's correct EB1 doesn't need a labor. Yes, wage some what relates to category but no all the times. As bhayzone pointed >50k does not always mean EB2 and also when eliminating cases some of the wages are shown per hr/per week/bi-weekly/by month, it's not that simple to separate EB2/EB3. May be we have to agree to a combination of salary and wage level before start sorting them out.

Also we can weed out lot of positions( Ex: carpenters/cooks/baby sitters/landscapers,trucker...etc..)

[qesehmk]

Bhayzone welcome! We try to be civil here. But sometimes it gets nasty and we argue with each other. But that's about as rowdy as it gets here!!

Comig to your contributions and questions..... I agree w KD and Veni. EB1 doesn't need PERM. And also salary or even type of job in PERM file is no guarantee of a particular classification (2/3/4). But of course we can make a guess.

Regarding your confusion about 09 cases in 10 data: that's because USCIS year is from 1 oct to 30th sep. So in 2010 USCIS year - the data shown would be 1 oct 2009 to 30 sep 2010.


Welcome to the forum.
Eb1 does not require PERM. Only Eb2 and Eb3 require it. So your calculations need to be redone. Moreover, wages have nothing to do with Eb2 or Eb3, its the job requirements - do they need MS or BS+5 etc. This info is not available in the PERM database. Wage may be a weak correlating aspect but its not a discerning aspect. Hence the folks on forum look at trackitt data, historical data etc.

[bieber]

Yes > 25K spillover... my pd is oct 22 2007... Still hoping i will get a chance to file EAD this year...

I think sofad/backlog elimination and applying for EAD is not as closely related as we think, technically CIS cannot wait until all the backlog is eliminated to receive new 485s, the battle will be they may argue (not in exact terms) 5000 pending inventory will be more than annual quota of India, and we know that will be cleared so easily with small spillover.

if CIS/DOS sees things as they are and accept spillover is possible and be proactive then they can open gates this Q4 fiscal. otherwise they will do that next year and waste quite a few visas

[bhayzone]

Kd2008,
That's correct EB1 doesn't need a labor. Yes, wage some what relates to category but no all the times. As bhayzone pointed >50k does not always mean EB2 and also when eliminating cases some of the wages are shown per hr/per week/bi-weekly/by month, it's not that simple to separate EB2/EB3. May be we have to agree to a combination of salary and wage level before start sorting them out.

Also we can weed out lot of positions( Ex: carpenters/cooks/baby sitters/landscapers,trucker...etc..)


I normalized all wages (hr/week/bi/mth) into yearly wages for analysis. I do understand that wage is not the best factor in determining EB category, but I guess it is the best that we have. I think, not many people earning 50k will be eligible for EB-2. There might be some, but I think that number will be insignificant. Similarly, the assumption that everyone earning > 100k is EB1 is the worst case scenario for EB2 I/C. This assumption assumes the least number of spillover into EB2. As we raise the wage bar for EB1, the spillover into EB2 will increase. I hope that made sense :-)

It would be great if we can arrive at an agreement on a salary/wage combination to sort out the PERM data. I would like to do some more crunching for 2006 - 2010 PERM data.

[bhayzone]

Sorry ppl, did not read the above posts about EB1 not requiring PERM carefully :-)

[veni001]

Yes > 25K spillover... my pd is oct 22 2007... Still hoping i will get a chance to file EAD this year...

The chances are very slim to none this year. Look at Q1 PERM data, kind of consistent.

Not including PWMB,porting cases you need a minimum of 32K SOFAD to clear EB2(I+C) until July 2007 based 01-05-2011 inventory update!

[cool189]

I am new to this forum. I have a question about spill over. Based on Visa Office FY 2010 Data (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/statistics/statistics_5240.html), the total EB2-IC approvals (including spill over) is 26,500. I am assuming EB2-IC approvals for FY 2011 should remain more or less same as that of FY 2010. If anyone disagrees with this assumption, can they let me know the potential reasons for the EB2-IC approvals in FY 2011 to be significantly higher or lower than that of FY 2010? Thanks in advance!

[veni001]

I normalized all wages (hr/week/bi/mth) into yearly wages for analysis.
......................

It would be great if we can arrive at an agreement on a salary/wage combination to sort out the PERM data. I would like to do some more crunching for 2006 - 2010 PERM data.

That's a good idea.

[veni001]

I am new to this forum. I have a question about spill over. Based on Visa Office FY2010 Data (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/statistics/statistics_5240.html), the total approved EB2-IC (including spill over) is 26,500. I am assuming this spill over should remain more or less same for FY 2011. Can anyone let me know what could be the potential reasons for the EB2-IC approvals in FY 2011 to be significantly higher or lower than that of FY 2010 ?

Cool189,
Please look through this forum posts(few pages back), which talks about back log cases being approved in recent years( ex: ~150K, i140 approvals in FY 2009 vs ~75k in FY2010)

[Osaka001]

Hi bhayzone,
Do you have any idea on how many EB2 ROW PERM approvals turned into I-140 approvals and filed I-485 till Sep-2010, If we can get this number, we can guess spill over from EB2 ROW for FY'11.

[cool189]

Well .. it takes lot of time to go through each post to get the reasons .. is there any summary for this thread?


Cool189,
Please look through this forum posts(few pages back), which talks about back log cases being approved in recent years( ex: ~150K, i140 approvals in FY 2009 vs ~75k in FY2010)