EB2 Predictions (Rather Calculations) - 2011

[vishnu]

veni - thanks for the number crunching. But is it 17.4k perm certifications after July 2007 for the FY 2007 OR for the calendar year 2007. If it is for the latter, wouldn't be too concerned as we would be double counting some certifications from FY 08 (which has shown reduced EB2 IC perm anyway). If it is the former, then it is a REAL headwind to movement.

[veni001]

veni - thanks for the number crunching. But is it 17.4k perm certifications after July 2007 for the FY 2007 OR for the calendar year 2007. If it is for the latter, wouldn't be too concerned as we would be double counting some certifications from FY 08 (which has shown reduced EB2 IC perm anyway). If it is the former, then it is a REAL headwind to movement.

vishnu,
I am taking it as FY, assuming PERM disclosure data represents federal fiscal year, unless other gurus tell otherwise.

[Spectator]

GCW

What it boils down to is - Spec's calculations show that PWMB might be 33% as opposed to 7% I had assumed. . The difference comes from teh fact that the 7% only relates to people who already had perm approved. The rest 26% were approved post Jul 2007.

So between Jan-Jul 2007 instead of 1.5K per month on average, the number is really 2K. So as the dates move ahead these extra 500 per month people will start filing.

For those not concerned with details ... essentially this is going to add 3.5K in PWMB (or about 2 months impact to our calculations). Header updated accordingly.

Q,

Thanks for turning the calculations into an easy to understand summary.

For IC combined, the average appears to increase from 2.1k per month to 3.1k per month over Jan-Jul 2007.

As has been noted, this is lowest in Jan (2.3k) to highest in July (5.7k), so we might theoretically reach March 2007 with 37k SOFAD.

Since DOS probably won't see this extra demand, because of the processing time for new applications, they would have to consider pushing the Cut Off Dates beyond that date to include enough applications that can be adjudicated before the end of September.

Moving into FY2012, DOS would then have to consider whether to retrogress the Cut Off Dates as USCIS report demand to them.

Is that a fair statement?

[Spectator]

vishnu,
I am taking it as FY, assuming PERM disclosure data represents federal fiscal year, unless other gurus tell otherwise.

Veni,

The PERM disclosure data is indeed for the FY October to September. That is for the date of adjudication (Certified, Denied, Withdrawn).

However, Priority Dates (extracted from the Case No.) are Calendar Year (Jan-Dec).

So the approval period may be different, but the PD doesn't change. The dates in the Demand Data and, more importantly, in the Visa Bulletin are CY.

I still probably haven't explained that very well.

Regards

[veni001]

veni - thanks for the number crunching. But is it 17.4k perm certifications after July 2007 for the FY 2007 OR for the calendar year 2007. If it is for the latter, wouldn't be too concerned as we would be double counting some certifications from FY 08 (which has shown reduced EB2 IC perm anyway). If it is the former, then it is a REAL headwind to movement.

vishnu,
I am taking it as FY, assuming PERM disclosure data represents federal fiscal year, unless other gurus tell otherwise.

vishnu,
It is CY not FY, Spec corrected me on this.

[veni001]

Veni,

The PERM disclosure data is indeed for the FY October to September. That is for the date of adjudication (Certified, Denied, Withdrawn).

However, Priority Dates (extracted from the Case No.) are Calendar Year (Jan-Dec).

So the approval period may be different, but the PD doesn't change. The dates in the Demand Data and, more importantly, in the Visa Bulletin are CY.

I still probably haven't explained that very well.

Regards

Spec,
Thanks for clarifying, i will make changes to my posts above.
Oct-06---Spet 07 will now become Jan 07 to Dec 07.

[qesehmk]

Spec

Yes. Agree. USCIS may choose to move dates a bit ahead to have enough applications. So yes the date could actually by Mar or even April.

I also think that if dates start pushing towards July 2007 then there is a strong possibility they might actually make the category current for a month and then pull it back. But of course there is a huge difference between Mar and Jul 07!



Q,

Thanks for turning the calculations into an easy to understand summary.

For IC combined, the average appears to increase from 2.1k per month to 3.1k per month over Jan-Jul 2007.

As has been noted, this is lowest in Jan (2.3k) to highest in July (5.7k), so we might theoretically reach March 2007 with 37k SOFAD.

Since DOS probably won't see this extra demand, because of the processing time for new applications, they would have to consider pushing the Cut Off Dates beyond that date to include enough applications that can be adjudicated before the end of September.

Moving into FY2012, DOS would then have to consider whether to retrogress the Cut Off Dates as USCIS report demand to them.

Is that a fair statement?

[veni001]

Q, Spec, Teddy and others..

Here is my table for Jan-Dec 2007 PD fro CHINA based on PERM certifications from AUG 2007 to SEPT FY2010.

- PD -- FY2007 - FY2008 - FY2009 - FY2010 -- Total -- % --
Jan-07 --- 12 ------ 7 ------ 8 ------ 0 ----- 27 --- 0.82%
Feb-07 --- 26 ------ 8 ------ 5 ------ 0 ----- 39 --- 1.19%
Mar-07 --- 48 ------ 10 ------ 3 ------ 1 ----- 62 --- 1.89%
Apr-07 -- 158 ------ 20 ------ 1 ------ 1 ---- 180 --- 5.48%
May-07 -- 133 ------ 19 ------ 7 ------ 4 ---- 163 --- 4.96%
Jun-07 -- 174 ------ 64 ----- 16 ------ 1 ---- 255 --- 7.76%
Jul-07 -- 155 ------ 81 ----- 19 ------ 2 ---- 257 --- 7.83%
Aug-07 -- 250 ----- 222 ----- 39 ----- 10 ---- 521 -- 15.86%
Sep-07 --- 35 ----- 352 ----- 58 ----- 28 ---- 473 -- 14.40%
Oct-07 ---- 0 ----- 398 ----- 12 ----- 42 ---- 452 -- 13.76%
Nov-07 ---- 0 ----- 433 ------ 5 ----- 54 ---- 492 -- 14.98%
Dec-07 ---- 0 ----- 302 ------ 6 ----- 55 ---- 363 -- 11.05%
Total --- 991 --- 1,916 ---- 179 ---- 198 -- 3,284 - 100.00%


Spec: I just copied your table format, since it looks good! Hope you don't mind.

I am working on getting expected PWMB i485 for EB2(I&C) for each month of CY 2007 based on above table for CHINA and Specs table for INDIA.

[Spectator]

Q, Spec, Teddy and others..

Here is my table for Jan-Dec 2007 PD fro CHINA based on PERM certifications from AUG 2007 to SEPT FY2010.

- PD -- FY2007 - FY2008 - FY2009 - FY2010 -- Total -- % --
Jan-07 --- 12 ------ 7 ------ 8 ------ 0 ----- 27 --- 0.82%
Feb-07 --- 26 ------ 8 ------ 5 ------ 0 ----- 39 --- 1.19%
Mar-07 --- 48 ------ 10 ------ 3 ------ 1 ----- 62 --- 1.89%
Apr-07 -- 158 ------ 20 ------ 1 ------ 1 ---- 180 --- 5.48%
May-07 -- 133 ------ 19 ------ 7 ------ 4 ---- 163 --- 4.96%
Jun-07 -- 174 ------ 64 ----- 16 ------ 1 ---- 255 --- 7.76%
Jul-07 -- 155 ------ 81 ----- 19 ------ 2 ---- 257 --- 7.83%
Aug-07 -- 250 ----- 222 ----- 39 ----- 10 ---- 521 -- 15.86%
Sep-07 --- 35 ----- 352 ----- 58 ----- 28 ---- 473 -- 14.40%
Oct-07 ---- 0 ----- 398 ----- 12 ----- 42 ---- 452 -- 13.76%
Nov-07 ---- 0 ----- 433 ------ 5 ----- 54 ---- 492 -- 14.98%
Dec-07 ---- 0 ----- 302 ------ 6 ----- 55 ---- 363 -- 11.05%
Total --- 991 --- 1,916 ---- 179 ---- 198 -- 3,284 - 100.00%


Spec: I just copied your table format, since it looks good! Hope you don't mind.

I am working on getting expected PWMB i485 for EB2(I&C) for each month of CY 2007 based on above table for CHINA and Specs table for INDIA.

Veni,

Good work. :D

I don't know why, but I agree with the bottom line figures whilst the monthly breakdown is slightly different. :confused:

It is only a few applications either way, so it doesn't matter.

Here is my China table for reference:

CHINA

- PD -- FY2007 - FY2008 - FY2009 - FY2010 -- Total -- % 2007 - % Jan-Jul
Jan-07 --- 12 ------- 7 ------ 8 ------ 0 ----- 27 --- 0.82% ---- 2.54%
Feb-07 --- 25 ------- 8 ------ 5 ------ 0 ----- 38 --- 1.16% ---- 3.57%
Mar-07 --- 49 ------ 10 ------ 3 ------ 1 ----- 63 --- 1.92% ---- 5.92%
Apr-07 -- 143 ------ 15 ------ 1 ------ 1 ---- 160 --- 4.87% --- 15.04%
May-07 -- 144 ------ 23 ------ 7 ------ 4 ---- 178 --- 5.42% --- 16.73%
Jun-07 -- 156 ------ 59 ----- 15 ------ 1 ---- 231 --- 7.03% --- 21.71%
Jul-07 -- 236 ----- 101 ----- 28 ------ 2 ---- 367 -- 11.18% --- 34.49%
Aug-07 -- 202 ----- 238 ----- 36 ----- 15 ---- 491 -- 14.95%
Sep-07 --- 24 ----- 322 ----- 53 ----- 23 ---- 422 -- 12.85%
Oct-07 ---- 0 ----- 398 ----- 12 ----- 42 ---- 452 -- 13.76%
Nov-07 ---- 0 ----- 432 ------ 4 ----- 53 ---- 489 -- 14.89%
Dec-07 ---- 0 ----- 303 ------ 7 ----- 56 ---- 366 -- 11.14%
Total --- 991 --- 1,916 ---- 179 ---- 198 -- 3,284 - 100.00% -- 100.00%

It just bugs the hell out of me that we don't agree exactly. That is my problem, not yours! :)

PS I used Courier New font because it is non-proportional and the figures therefore line up correctly.

I am having some difficulty these days with formatting posts in different fonts. I used to be able to highlight the text and apply it in the forum editing window. I suspect it has to do with moving to IE9, but even using IE8 mode doesn't fix it. I have to format outside the forum and then paste it in - it's a pain.

[TeddyKoochu]

Q,
Since we saw about 60% decrease in overall EB1 filings, not sure if we can assume at least 50% of the EBI PERMs are for those EB1s now filing in EB2? this will be a big factor when comes to porting calculations?



Teddy,
My median salary comparison is only from EBI PERMs, if most of these ERMs from FY2011 are new (otherwise filed in EB1 cases), i don't think we will have very many porting cases from Q1 FY2011 data?

Veni EB1 as such does not require perm. However with the way things are I believe most attorneys may already be advising ROW folks to file in EB2. However since the difference between EB2 and EB1 salaries may not be that much in most cases it will be hard to figure out from the perm data as to how many ROW folks are now trying for EB2. As for the retrogressed countries if EB1 is possible its always worth the try.



Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
- Traditionally also people who apply for EB1 A & B also have been filing a EB2 or EB2 NIW application just in case. That may be true for some. However wouldnt employers be averse to filing both - especially when EB2 is so difficult given all the perm requirements?

For those from ROW EB1 is faster because of no labor requirement - EB1 doesn't have any labor for all countries. So didnt understand ....

- On another side the salaries in research are not eye poppingly high - True and not true. Typically the salaries would be 20-30K higher. Depending on the industry they could be higher or lower than this range. However one more thing that needs to be considered is that the EB1 salaries we are talking here is a subset of the overall research salaries ... so while overall EB1 salaries may not be that eye poppingly high, the EB1 here could actually be. e.g. even for H1 or EB2 a company has to prove that they are paying equivalent or more money to the candidate BECAUSE there are fewer people who could do this job. Similarly for EB1 (except there is no labor.... but the pay philosophy applies). Think this way.... why would a US company hire somebody and go through filing GC unless the person isn't in top 5% of the similar pool. And if so ... wouldn't you expect teh salary to be at least 10-20% higher?


So while it maybe true that folks from ROW maybe tending to EB2 for safety from the perm data it is not possible to decipher or quantify this but surely this is happening as getting EB1 approvals after the Kazarian memo is tougher. I think this certainly makes sense.

Q here we are talking about EB1 A & B most of then are either PhD holders or superspecialised doctors. Getting a EB2 perm or I140 for them is like a piece of cake. I agree with your point that companies would not be very open to file 2 applications however the split between Eb1 A and B is 50-50 and EB1A is a self filed application typically most EB1-A folks file another EB2 application through their employer or EB2-NIW on their own. You may remember kondur_007. Some organizations also reimburse a fixed amount and give people to chose their own attorney, this is typically the case in academia. Salaries could be a function of many things like location, demand etc in the current time the core engineering research jobs are not too many and they are mostly in Tier B or C locations not in the hot and costly cities this is why the salaries become comparable, for people in niche high end and in demand skills sky is the limit. For people in academia the salaries are moderate they do not really compare with the industry

If we look at Trackitt EB1 data this year the fall is drastic for EB1 A and significant for EB1 B which we can truely attribute to the Kazarian memo. However since for Eb1 really no way of estimation has proven good we should be using the 12K as the minimum from all the reports.

[TeddyKoochu]

Spec & Veni thanks for your analysis on PWMB. Looking at your table can we conclude that the PWMB figure till 01-Aug -2007 is in the 5-6K range. For my approximations I had done the computation based on the fact that it was taking 1-4 months for perm approval so the number of PWMB's before April will be very few. Your analysis on the PWMB's also indicates that there is virtually no traffic in 2009 and 2010 this could be great news once the date actually crosses 2008.

Q I agree with you that there is a huge difference between Apr 2007 and Jul 2007 I certainly agree that Apr 2007 is quite possible but to make it Jul 2007 still requires a big push. At the header of the thread I believe you can consider revising the worst case scenario from Sep 2006 I think that will be breached for sure, maybe Nov 2006 is still quite conservative.

[veni001]

Veni EB1 as such does not require perm. However with the way things are I believe most attorneys may already be advising ROW folks to file in EB2. However since the difference between EB2 and EB1 salaries may not be that much in most cases it will be hard to figure out from the perm data as to how many ROW folks are now trying for EB2. As for the retrogressed countries if EB1 is possible its always worth the try.
......................
.......................
.

Teddy,
Yes, we are all in agreement with this now.

[veni001]

Veni,

Good work. :D

I don't know why, but I agree with the bottom line figures whilst the monthly breakdown is slightly different. :confused:

It is only a few applications either way, so it doesn't matter.

Here is my China table for reference:

CHINA

- PD -- FY2007 - FY2008 - FY2009 - FY2010 -- Total -- % 2007 - % Jan-Jul
Jan-07 --- 12 ------- 7 ------ 8 ------ 0 ----- 27 --- 0.82% ---- 2.54%
Feb-07 --- 25 ------- 8 ------ 5 ------ 0 ----- 38 --- 1.16% ---- 3.57%
Mar-07 --- 49 ------ 10 ------ 3 ------ 1 ----- 63 --- 1.92% ---- 5.92%
Apr-07 -- 143 ------ 15 ------ 1 ------ 1 ---- 160 --- 4.87% --- 15.04%
May-07 -- 144 ------ 23 ------ 7 ------ 4 ---- 178 --- 5.42% --- 16.73%
Jun-07 -- 156 ------ 59 ----- 15 ------ 1 ---- 231 --- 7.03% --- 21.71%
Jul-07 -- 236 ----- 101 ----- 28 ------ 2 ---- 367 -- 11.18% --- 34.49%
Aug-07 -- 202 ----- 238 ----- 36 ----- 15 ---- 491 -- 14.95%
Sep-07 --- 24 ----- 322 ----- 53 ----- 23 ---- 422 -- 12.85%
Oct-07 ---- 0 ----- 398 ----- 12 ----- 42 ---- 452 -- 13.76%
Nov-07 ---- 0 ----- 432 ------ 4 ----- 53 ---- 489 -- 14.89%
Dec-07 ---- 0 ----- 303 ------ 7 ----- 56 ---- 366 -- 11.14%
Total --- 991 --- 1,916 ---- 179 ---- 198 -- 3,284 - 100.00% -- 100.00%

It just bugs the hell out of me that we don't agree exactly. That is my problem, not yours! :)

PS I used Courier New font because it is non-proportional and the figures therefore line up correctly.

I am having some difficulty these days with formatting posts in different fonts. I used to be able to highlight the text and apply it in the forum editing window. I suspect it has to do with moving to IE9, but even using IE8 mode doesn't fix it. I have to format outside the forum and then paste it in - it's a pain.

I am doing the same now. :)



Spec,
Not huge difference in the monthly distributions, so we are OK!

[veni001]

Q, Spec, Teddy and others..

Here is my table for Jan-Dec 2007 PD fro CHINA based on PERM certifications from AUG 2007 to SEPT FY2010.

- PD -- FY2007 - FY2008 - FY2009 - FY2010 -- Total -- % --
Jan-07 --- 12 ------ 7 ------ 8 ------ 0 ----- 27 --- 0.82%
Feb-07 --- 26 ------ 8 ------ 5 ------ 0 ----- 39 --- 1.19%
Mar-07 --- 48 ------ 10 ------ 3 ------ 1 ----- 62 --- 1.89%
Apr-07 -- 158 ------ 20 ------ 1 ------ 1 ---- 180 --- 5.48%
May-07 -- 133 ------ 19 ------ 7 ------ 4 ---- 163 --- 4.96%
Jun-07 -- 174 ------ 64 ----- 16 ------ 1 ---- 255 --- 7.76%
Jul-07 -- 155 ------ 81 ----- 19 ------ 2 ---- 257 --- 7.83%
Aug-07 -- 250 ----- 222 ----- 39 ----- 10 ---- 521 -- 15.86%
Sep-07 --- 35 ----- 352 ----- 58 ----- 28 ---- 473 -- 14.40%
Oct-07 ---- 0 ----- 398 ----- 12 ----- 42 ---- 452 -- 13.76%
Nov-07 ---- 0 ----- 433 ------ 5 ----- 54 ---- 492 -- 14.98%
Dec-07 ---- 0 ----- 302 ------ 6 ----- 55 ---- 363 -- 11.05%
Total --- 991 --- 1,916 ---- 179 ---- 198 -- 3,284 - 100.00%


Spec: I just copied your table format, since it looks good! Hope you don't mind.

I am working on getting expected PWMB i485 for EB2(I&C) for each month of CY 2007 based on above table for CHINA and Specs table for INDIA.

Q, Spec, Teddy and others.... below is my update on PWMB i485 numbers

Looking at PERM Certifications and i485 pending for JAN-JULY 2007 for INDIA and CHINA

INDIA:
JAN-JULY PERM = 8.9k
JAN-JULY i485 = 9.9k(EB2)+4.6k(EB3) = 14.5k

Based on above PERM&i485 data, split between EB2 & EB3 is 68%(EB2) and 32%(EB3)

CHINA:
JAN-JULY PERM = 2.6k
JAN-JULY i485 = 5.5k(EB2)+0.6k(EB3) = 6.1k

Based on above PERM&i485 data, split between EB2 & EB3 is 90%(EB2) and 10%(EB3)

I am using the same % from above and 15% denial/rejections at i140 stage to derive expected EB2(I&C)i-485 for each month of CY 2007 in the table below(based on EB(I&C) PWMB PERM data).


- PD ---- EB2I ---- EB2C ---- EB2(I+C) -- Cumulative--
Jan-07 ---- 99 ------ 45 ------ 145 -------- 145
Feb-07 --- 198 ------ 66 ------ 264 -------- 409
Mar-07 --- 347 ----- 104 ------ 451 -------- 860
Apr-07 --- 814 ----- 303 -----1,117 ------ 1,977
May-07 --1,052 ----- 274 -----1,326 ------ 3,303
Jun-07 --1,260 ----- 429 -----1,689 ------ 4,992
Jul-07 --1,989 ----- 433 -----2,421 ------ 7,413
Aug-07 --2,269 ----- 877 -----3,145 ----- 10,559
Sep-07 --2,372 ----- 796 -----3,168 ----- 13,726
Oct-07 --2,758 ----- 761 -----3,519 ----- 17,245
Nov-07 --2,464 ----- 828 -----3,292 ----- 20,538
Dec-07 --2,375 ----- 611 -----2,986 ----- 23,524
Total ---17,997 --- 5,527 ---23,524


These numbers represent only those PERM approvals after July 2007 with 2007PD. We have to add those who got their PERM certified before AUG 2007
and did not file i485, spouse yet to file i485 and porting numbers. The first two numbers may not be very significant though!

So the bottom line is USCIS will not see PWMB impact until dates move to 01MAY2007 or 01JUN2007 for both IND and CHINA. Unless porting cases are really high, as
some people(including DOS/USCIS) predicting, dates should move in the final quarter as predicted before!

[veni001]

Spec & Veni thanks for your analysis on PWMB. Looking at your table can we conclude that the PWMB figure till 01-Aug -2007 is in the 5-6K range. For my approximations I had done the computation based on the fact that it was taking 1-4 months for perm approval so the number of PWMB's before April will be very few. Your analysis on the PWMB's also indicates that there is virtually no traffic in 2009 and 2010 this could be great news once the date actually crosses 2008.

Teddy looks like you are mistaken looking at just PD 2007 PERM certifications in 2008 & 2009, Below is EB (I&C) PERM certification with PD 2008 & PD 2009
India PD2008 = 8.0k+10.0k+3.7k~=21.7k -------------------India PD2009 = 8+15.0k+92~=15.1k
China PD2008 = 1.4k+1.9k+0.7K~=4.0k ----------------------China PD2009 = 2+2.2k+9=2.2k


Q I agree with you that there is a huge difference between Apr 2007 and Jul 2007 I certainly agree that Apr 2007 is quite possible but to make it Jul 2007 still requires a big push. At the header of the thread I believe you can consider revising the worst case scenario from Sep 2006 I think that will be breached for sure, maybe Nov 2006 is still quite conservative.

Teddy,
It is about 7-8k, see the table i have posted.

[qesehmk]

Q I agree with you that there is a huge difference between Apr 2007 and Jul 2007 I certainly agree that Apr 2007 is quite possible but to make it Jul 2007 still requires a big push. At the header of the thread I believe you can consider revising the worst case scenario from Sep 2006 I think that will be breached for sure, maybe Nov 2006 is still quite conservative.

Teddy .. the worst case scenario is 24K gross SOFAD. With porting it becomes about 20K net sofad which probably takes us through Sep or Oct 2006 (based on 1oct2010 inventory). But of course the probability is quite low. Most likely scenario is 37K gross sofad and 30K net which means may be Feb or Mar 2007.

[veni001]

Spec & Veni thanks for your analysis on PWMB. Looking at your table can we conclude that the PWMB figure till 01-Aug -2007 is in the 5-6K range. For my approximations I had done the computation based on the fact that it was taking 1-4 months for perm approval so the number of PWMB's before April will be very few. Your analysis on the PWMB's also indicates that there is virtually no traffic in 2009 and 2010 this could be great news once the date actually crosses 2008.

Q I agree with you that there is a huge difference between Apr 2007 and Jul 2007 I certainly agree that Apr 2007 is quite possible but to make it Jul 2007 still requires a big push. At the header of the thread I believe you can consider revising the worst case scenario from Sep 2006 I think that will be breached for sure, maybe Nov 2006 is still quite conservative.

Teddy,
The outlook is not that encouraging.
Assuming that USCIS may be able to clear up-to MAR2007 in FY2011 for EB2I&C we are still going to have about 9k( pending inventory)+21k PWMB (for CY 2007) = 30k i-485 between EB2I&C in CY 2007.

CY2008
EB2(I+C) PERM = 21.7k+4.0k = 25.7k (assume 5.7 towards porting and rejections, 80%-EB2)= 16k~= 35k - i485
CY2009
EB2(I+C) PERM = 15.1K+2.2k =17.3k (assume 5.3 towards porting and rejections, 80%-EB2)= 9.6k~= 21k - i485

We are looking at additional(9k+21k+35k+21k) 86k+ Porting to clear through CY 2009.

Assuming EB2(I+C) will get about 25k on average for few more years years,I would stick to our rule of five for EB2

[vishnu]

Veni - the 76+ porting you are referring to includes the current inventory right (whatever is already in the demand data)?

[veni001]

Veni - the 86+ porting you are referring to includes the current inventory right (whatever is already in the demand data)?

Vishnu,
I for got to include it, so it will be 86k+ porting numbers for the next couple of years

[Spectator]

It looks like DOL have been putting a big effort into adjudicating PERM cases undergoing Audit.

http://icert.doleta.gov/

The date has moved from March 2009 in March to December 2009 in April.

People have been complaining normal PERM approvals times have increased - possibly this movement for Audit cases explains why.

It also matches Trackitt data when I last looked - there did appear to be more than usual audit cases and not all of them were 2 years old.

[vishnu]

guys - what was the spillover last year and how much went to India and China EB2? tks

[anuran]

Spillover for FY10,
India ~16900
China ~3500
from ~20000 spillover to EB2.

[veni001]

It looks like DOL have been putting a big effort into adjudicating PERM cases undergoing Audit.

http://icert.doleta.gov/

The date has moved from March 2009 in March to December 2009 in April.

People have been complaining normal PERM approvals times have increased - possibly this movement for Audit cases explains why.

It also matches Trackitt data when I last looked - there did appear to be more than usual audit cases and not all of them were 2 years old.

Spec,
Other reason could be, DOL may not have very many pending(Audit) cases from 2009! As we can see from PERM disclosure data 2009 saw the bottom for both PERM filings and certification.

[gcwait2007]

GCW

What it boils down to is - Spec's calculations show that PWMB might be 33% as opposed to 7% I had assumed. . The difference comes from teh fact that the 7% only relates to people who already had perm approved. The rest 26% were approved post Jul 2007.

So between Jan-Jul 2007 instead of 1.5K per month on average, the number is really 2K. So as the dates move ahead these extra 500 per month people will start filing.

For those not concerned with details ... essentially this is going to add 3.5K in PWMB (or about 2 months impact to our calculations). Header updated accordingly.

Q,

Thanks for converting the gathered knowledge into wisdom.

Thanks,
gcw07

[veni001]

Q, Spec and other gurus...
What % of PERM approvals make it to i140 stage? Also what is the average time lag between PERM approval and i140 submittal?

[vishnu]

Veni - since there is plenty of time during the PERM process (e.g. cooling off period) to gather documents, I would think I140 is submitted very soon after the PERM approval. Would also think around 90% of PERMs are approved at I-140 stage these days given I-140 scrutiny levels are on the up.

[qesehmk]

Q, Spec and other gurus...
What % of PERM approvals make it to i140 stage? Also what is the average time lag between PERM approval and i140 submittal?

Veni ... agree w Vishnu. The time to file 140 shouldn't be more than 2 months on average.

Regarding %approval, trackitt shows following - D A and % Denied
PD Year 2007 140 946 13%
Calendar Year 2010 till today - 199 2287 8%

[veni001]

Veni - since there is plenty of time during the PERM process (e.g. cooling off period) to gather documents, I would think I140 is submitted very soon after the PERM approval. Would also think around 90% of PERMs are approved at I-140 stage these days given I-140 scrutiny levels are on the up.


Veni ... agree w Vishnu. The time to file 140 shouldn't be more than 2 months on average.

Regarding %approval, trackitt shows following - D A and % Denied
PD Year 2007 140 946 13%
Calendar Year 2010 till today - 199 2287 8%

Q, Vishnu,
I agree with i140 denial rate and we are using 15% denial/rejections between No. of PERM approvals to No. of i140 approvals, for our calculations.

The above number averages about 10% rejections at i140, does this mean our assumption of certified PERMs that never make it to i140 stage is 5% or it is even less?

If our assumption is all PERMs at least make it to i140 stage( application), then i140 receipts (on an average)= PERM approvals +EB1 i140+EB2-NIW i140, am i correct?

[Spectator]

Q, Vishnu,
I agree with i140 denial rate and we are using 15% denial/rejections between No. of PERM approvals to No. of i140 approvals, for our calculations.

The above number averages about 10% rejections at i140, does this mean our assumption of certified PERMs that never make it to i140 stage is 5% or it is even less?

If our assumption is all PERMs at least make it to i140 stage( application), then i140 receipts (on an average)= PERM approvals +EB1 i140+EB2-NIW i140, am i correct?

veni,

Personally, I think 15% denial rate is too high.

EB2 has pretty objective criteria and you either meet them or you don't.

Whilst educational qualifications (3 year degree issue) might have led to a higher denial rate in the past, people (employer, employee and lawyers) are pretty educated about USCIS' view on this now.

EB1-B, which is much more subjective, has a denial rate of less than 10%.

For the other question, why would an employer go through all the time and expense to get a PERM approval and then not proceed to submit an I-140?

It is also in the employee's interest to ensure this happens, since they can't claim the PD for future applications unless the I-140 is approved.

Add to that the fact that the employee may need the approved I-140 to extend H1B beyond 6 years in 3 year increments and I think the conversion rate is going to be near enough to 100% that we can ignore the cases where an I-140 application does not follow a PERM approval.

My 2c anyway.

[veni001]

veni,

Personally, I think 15% denial rate is too high.

EB2 has pretty objective criteria and you either meet them or you don't.

Whilst educational qualifications (3 year degree issue) might have led to a higher denial rate in the past, people (employer, employee and lawyers) are pretty educated about USCIS' view on this now.

EB1-B, which is much more subjective, has a denial rate of less than 10%.

For the other question, why would an employer go through all the time and expense to get a PERM approval and then not proceed to submit an I-140?

It is also in the employee's interest to ensure this happens, since they can't claim the PD for future applications unless the I-140 is approved.

Add to that the fact that the employee may need the approved I-140 to extend H1B beyond 6 years in 3 year increments and I think the conversion rate is going to be near enough to 100% that we can ignore the cases where an I-140 application does not follow a PERM approval.

My 2c anyway.

Spec,
That perfectly make sense, which means i140 receipts (on an average)= PERM approvals +EB1 i140+EB2-NIW i140

or we can round it off to , I140 Receipts ~= PERM approvals +EB1i140 (since EB2-NIW % is very less)

P.S:I am crunching some numbers, will get back to you folks later in the day.

[pch053]

On a slightly different note, do you guys think that the # of approved EB2 I140 applicants discontinuiing their GC/I485 process in the same category is non-negligible (with probable reasons being getting approved in EB1 category, leaving US, etc). I personally know of a couple of EB2-I applicants who had approved I140's but also applied in EB1A category and have already got their I485 approvals. But, I am not sure how significant this number will be in the overall pool.

Thanks!

[gcwait2007]

On a slightly different note, do you guys think that the # of approved EB2 I140 applicants discontinuiing their GC/I485 process in the same category is non-negligible (with probable reasons being getting approved in EB1 category, leaving US, etc). I personally know of a couple of EB2-I applicants who had approved I140's but also applied in EB1A category and have already got their I485 approvals. But, I am not sure how significant this number will be in the overall pool.

Thanks!

That will be handful! in my guesstimate, EB2 to EB1 upgrades are less than 50 in number.

[veni001]

ROW PERM Certifications (FY/CY Matrix)

- PD -- FY-2007 -- FY-2008 -- FY-2009 -- FY-2010 - Q1&Q2-2011 -- CY Total
2005 ---2,318 -----186 --------21 ----------12 ---------1 ---------2,538
2006 --24,695 -----754 -------254 ----------70 ---------4 --------25,777
2007 --26,680 --14,473 -----1,661 -------1,523 --------44 --------44,381
2008 --- N/A ---13,895 ----14,059 ------ 6,574 -----2,451 --------36,979
2009 --- N/A ----- N/A ---------8 ------21,199 -------737 --------21,944
2010 --- N/A ----- N/A -------N/A -------7,877 -----9,232 --------17,109
2011 --- N/A ----- N/A -------N/A -------N/A -------2,811 --------14,387
Total -53,693 --29,308 ----16,003 ------37,255 ----15,280

Columns show FY PERM approvals, rows show PD by CY.

As we can see ROW filings as well as certifications peaked in 2007 and saw bottom in 2009. Since we only have Q1&Q2 FY2011 data, not sure how many more ROW PD 2010 are pending at DOL as of Dec 2010.

[qesehmk]

Veni

Excellent work. Now this is where trackitt is extremely useful. Here are some findings from trackitt relative to ROW pending/approved ratio. These are very rough calculations .... so don't jump on me :-)


2009 - 20%.
2010 - 20%
2011 YTD - 50%
2011 YoY volume for NEW PERM cases - 10% down.

So this is how many all ROW PERM cases stand today (based on above findings and the data you provided).
2009 = 5000
2010 = 3000
2011 = 16000
---------------

So total additional ROW PERM cases that DoL can process if they want to = 24000
Add the 8000 they already have by now. So total = 32000.

Of this assume 50% is EB2 (spec teddy and others check this assumption in particular) = 16000
This translates to approx 35K.

So if DoL wants to ... they can actually go ahead and process enough ROW PERMs to utilize all of EB2 ROW quota this year itself.

If this happens, then EB2IC is at the mercy of EB1 and EB5 and the dates would range between Sep 06 and Dec 06.

However the more likely scenario is that PERM approvals could be in the neighborhood of 30K...and then not all of them (i mean whoever from EB2 catgory) will be able to file and get a number this year itself. So EB2 ROW should give about 8K and EB2IC should be around Feb-Apr 2007.



ROW PERM Certifications (FY/CY Matrix)

- PD -- FY-2007 -- FY-2008 -- FY-2009 -- FY-2010 -- Q1-2011 -- CY Total
2005 ---2,318 -----186 --------21 ----------12 ------1 ---------2,538
2006 --24,695 -----754 -------254 ----------70 ------1 --------25,774
2007 --26,680 --14,473 -----1,661 -------1,523 -----21 --------44,358
2008 --- N/A ---13,895 ----14,059 ------ 6,574 --1,421 --------35,949
2009 --- N/A ----- N/A ---------8 ------21,199 -----98 --------21,305
2010 --- N/A ----- N/A -------N/A -------7,877 --6,510 --------14,387
Total -53,693 ---29,308 ---16,003 ------37,255 --8,052

Columns show FY PERM approvals, rows show PD by CY.

As we can see ROW filings as well as certifications peaked in 2007 and saw bottom in 2009. Since we only have Q1 FY2011 data, not sure how many more ROW PD 2010 are pending at DOL as of Dec 2010.

[vishnu]

Veni / Q - excellent work guys! I would say that given this statement in the last visa bulletin : "Based on current levels of demand, there will be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment First and Second preferences", it is safe to assume ROW will provide spillover to EB2 IC. So 8-19k sounds v reasonable.

[TeddyKoochu]

@veni /spec- Great work and thanks for the compilation.

@q - "2011 YoY volume for NEW PERM cases - 10% down." this trend bears quite a close correlation to Trackitt where the current ratio between 2011 and 2010 is 86% but its accelerating fast (Refer analysis from Spec). Now the idea of classifying perms as 50% EB2 and the rest of the 50% as ROW is actually a big assumption this is where I would say Trackitt percentage reduction works more simplistically especially for EB2 ROW. @spec I noticed that the data for Mexico and Philippines on Trackitt even though very low kind of correlates well with EB2 Row in general. By 86% we would arrive at ~ 11K SOFAD from EB2 ROW something quite similar to last year. There are a few things to note even though perm is faster now the I140 approvals are taking 8 months now this will help us however a note of caution about Trackitt they have started a paid section on the website for data analytics and many people are not enthused by this, this in fact will cause people not to enter their case details so Trackitt will not be reliable further down.

[Spectator]

Just some questions about the analysis.

There is a statement:

2011 YoY volume for NEW PERM cases - 10% down
That doesn't seem to be the case on a purely YOY comparison. Here are the comparative numbers for FY2010 Q1 and FY2011 Q1.

Country/Group – FY2010 Q1 – FY2011 Q1 - % Change
MEXICO------------ 563 ------- 710 ------ 26.11%
PHILIPPINES------- 578 ------- 746 ------ 29.07%
ROW------------- 5,363 ----- 6,596 ------ 22.99%
Grand Total ---- 6,504 ----- 8,052 ------ 23.80%

I've been holding off to see the FY2011 Q2 figures, because I wanted to see if there was a similar pattern to last year. The table below shows the approvals by FY quarter.

DOS NAME ----- FY.Qtr - No. ----- %
MEXICO --------- Q1 ---- 563 -- 17.03%
---------------- Q2 -- 1,081 -- 32.70%
---------------- Q3 ---- 999 -- 30.22%
---------------- Q4 ---- 663 -- 20.05%
MEXICO Total --------- 3,306 - 100.00%

PHILIPPINES ---- Q1 ---- 578 -- 17.49%
---------------- Q2 -- 1,184 -- 35.82%
---------------- Q3 ---- 934 -- 28.26%
---------------- Q4 ---- 609 -- 18.43%
PHILIPPINES Total ---- 3,305 - 100.00%

ROW ------------ Q1 -- 5,363 -- 17.50%
---------------- Q2 - 11,074 -- 36.14%
---------------- Q3 -- 8,612 -- 28.10%
---------------- Q4 -- 5,595 -- 18.26%
ROW Total ----------- 30,644 - 100.00%

ROW-M-P
Q1 ------------------- 6,504 -- 17.46%
Q2 ------------------ 13,339 -- 35.80%
Q3 ------------------ 10,545 -- 28.30%
Q4 ------------------- 6,867 -- 18.43%
Grand Total --------- 37,255

As you can see from the table above, Q1 had the lowest % of PERM approvals, with a substantial increase in Q2 and Q3.

Changing factors may mean that doesn't happen, but it would be nice to have some confirmation of that.

I think PERM approvals from FY2011 Q2 would also stand a fair chance of being approved for EB2-ROW-M-P who file concurrent I-140/I-485 applications.

As usual, I am pretty cautious.

[qesehmk]

Spec

You seem to have missed 2 things:

1. I used CY data from trackitt.
2. I used filings as opposed to approvals. (the 10% down statement..)

And finally mind you ... those are back of the napkin calculations... to get our heads around the significant of what veni produced.

Now commenting on what you wrote below .. I would watch not just YoY increase or decrease ... but where the increase is coming from. e.g. in this case ... if 2010 Q1 had an artificial low rate of approval followed by surge ... that in itself makes in YoY increase in Q1 of 2011 not so worrisome. Right?


Just some questions about the analysis.

[veni001]

Veni

Excellent work. Now this is where trackitt is extremely useful. Here are some findings from trackitt relative to ROW pending/approved ratio. These are very rough calculations .... so don't jump on me :-)


2009 - 20%.
2010 - 20%
2011 YTD - 50%
2011 YoY volume for NEW PERM cases - 10% down.

So this is how many all ROW PERM cases stand today (based on above findings and the data you provided).
2009 = 5000
2010 = 3000
2011 = 16000
---------------

So total additional ROW PERM cases that DoL can process if they want to = 24000
Add the 8000 they already have by now. So total = 32000.

Of this assume 50% is EB2 (spec teddy and others check this assumption in particular) = 16000
This translates to approx 35K.

So if DoL wants to ... they can actually go ahead and process enough ROW PERMs to utilize all of EB2 ROW quota this year itself.

If this happens, then EB2IC is at the mercy of EB1 and EB5 and the dates would range between Sep 06 and Dec 06.

However the more likely scenario is that PERM approvals could be in the neighborhood of 30K...and then not all of them (i mean whoever from EB2 catgory) will be able to file and get a number this year itself. So EB2 ROW should give about 8K and EB2IC should be around Feb-Apr 2007.

Q,
This should be higher percentage! i am tryung to get monthly breakdown to figureout EB1 case, we know that they are decreased by 60-70%, which resulted in higher EB2%


Veni / Q - excellent work guys! I would say that given this statement in the last visa bulletin : "Based on current levels of demand, there will be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment First and Second preferences", it is safe to assume ROW will provide spillover to EB2 IC. So 8-19k sounds v reasonable.


Vishnu,
I am getting little un easy looking at ROW PERM, i will throw some numbers for discussion later in the day.

@veni /spec- Great work and thanks for the compilation.

@q - "2011 YoY volume for NEW PERM cases - 10% down." this trend bears quite a close correlation to Trackitt where the current ratio between 2011 and 2010 is 86% but its accelerating fast (Refer analysis from Spec). Now the idea of classifying perms as 50% EB2 and the rest of the 50% as ROW is actually a big assumption this is where I would say Trackitt percentage reduction works more simplistically especially for EB2 ROW. @spec I noticed that the data for Mexico and Philippines on Trackitt even though very low kind of correlates well with EB2 Row in general. By 86% we would arrive at ~ 11K SOFAD from EB2 ROW something quite similar to last year. There are a few things to note even though perm is faster now the I140 approvals are taking 8 months now this will help us however a note of caution about Trackitt they have started a paid section on the website for data analytics and many people are not enthused by this, this in fact will cause people not to enter their case details so Trackitt will not be reliable further down.

Teddy,
I agree.



Please see my comments above, will be back with numbers.

[Spectator]

Spec

You seem to have missed 2 things:

1. I used CY data from trackitt.
2. I used filings as opposed to approvals. (the 10% down statement..)

And finally mind you ... those are back of the napkin calculations... to get our heads around the significant of what veni produced.

Now commenting on what you wrote below .. I would watch not just YoY increase or decrease ... but where the increase is coming from. e.g. in this case ... if 2010 Q1 had an artificial low rate of approval followed by surge ... that in itself makes in YoY increase in Q1 of 2011 not so worrisome. Right?
Q,

Thanks for the reply. You made it clear they were "back of the envelope" calcs.

It is getting quite difficult to keep up with the different time scales used, so apologies for not reading carefully enough.

Not worrisome if the surge is not repeated! There is a big IF in that statement. Do we know whether Q1 2010 was low?

The same Low, High, High, Low pattern was also seen in FY2009 for Q1-Q4. Q1 FY2010 was very big compared to Q4 FY2009.

I am not criticizing, or disagreeing for that matter, just emphasizing why I am so keen to see the Q2 2011 PERM figures!

I do think it will work out - I just want confirmation.

[qesehmk]

Spec

I do not know whether 2010 Q1 was low. I said it looking at Veni's approval table. If you look at it ... you can clear see the years when PERM backlog accumulated and years when it was cleared.

To be honest ... USCIS and other agencies have the means to execute any policy that they want. So I wouldn't double guess ROW's ability to fully utilize its quota this year too. Lucky us ... EB1 and EB5 are there to help!

p.s. - To be honest ... this whole calculations based predictions is something we started last year ... but I think we are taking it a bit too far. Sometimes it is best to sit back and let new data come out before we change our thinking!


Q,

Thanks for the reply. You made it clear they were "back of the envelope" calcs.

It is getting quite difficult to keep up with the different time scales used, so apologies for not reading carefully enough.

Not worrisome if the surge is not repeated! There is a big IF in that statement. Do we know whether Q1 2010 was low?

The same Low, High, High, Low pattern was also seen in FY2009 for Q1-Q4. Q1 FY2010 was very big compared to Q4 FY2009.

I am not criticizing, or disagreeing for that matter, just emphasizing why I am so keen to see the Q2 2011 PERM figures!

I do think it will work out - I just want confirmation.

[kd2008]

ROW PERM Certifications (FY/CY Matrix)

- PD -- FY-2007 -- FY-2008 -- FY-2009 -- FY-2010 -- Q1-2011 -- CY Total
2005 ---2,318 -----186 --------21 ----------12 ------1 ---------2,538
2006 --24,695 -----754 -------254 ----------70 ------1 --------25,774
2007 --26,680 --14,473 -----1,661 -------1,523 -----21 --------44,358
2008 --- N/A ---13,895 ----14,059 ------ 6,574 --1,421 --------35,949
2009 --- N/A ----- N/A ---------8 ------21,199 -----98 --------21,305
2010 --- N/A ----- N/A -------N/A -------7,877 --6,510 --------14,387
Total -53,693 ---29,308 ---16,003 ------37,255 --8,052

Columns show FY PERM approvals, rows show PD by CY.

As we can see ROW filings as well as certifications peaked in 2007 and saw bottom in 2009. Since we only have Q1 FY2011 data, not sure how many more ROW PD 2010 are pending at DOL as of Dec 2010.

Veni,

The above table is simply amazing. I have a favor to ask of you. Could you please build similar table each for India and China? If its already been done could you please let me know the link?

Thanks!

[veni001]

Veni,

The above table is simply amazing. I have a favor to ask of you. Could you please build similar table each for India and China? If its already been done could you please let me know the link?

Thanks!

Kd2008,
Yes, It is coming later in the day. :)

[kd2008]

Kd2008,
Yes, It is coming later in the day. :)

Awesome! Also Q2 2011 PERM data is now available here:

http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/quarterlydata.cfm

It would be super great if you are able to include it too.

[veni001]

Q,Spec,Teddy and others
Below is the monthly approval breakdown of PERM certifications & i140 receipts for FY 2009, FY 2010 and Q1&Q2-2011, I am trying to sort out the EB1 & ROW EB2 scenario

- Month -- ROW(2&3) ---EBI(2&3) ---EBC(2&3) --Monthly Total-- i140 Receipts
Oct-08 ------897 --------649 ---------156 ---------1,702 -------3,140(Estimated)
Nov-08 ------508 --------481 ----------83 ---------1,072 -------3,140(Estimated)
Dec-08 ------194 ---------87 ----------13 -----------294 -------4,161
Jan-09 ----1,724 ----- 1,104 ---------246 ---------3,074 -------3,140
Feb-09 ----1,115 --------719 ---------164 ---------1,998 -------3,464
Mar-09 ----2,267 ------1,425 ---------272 ---------3,964 -------4,266
Apr-09-- --4,616 ------3,012 ---------559 ---------8,187 -------4,505
May-09 ----2,326 ------1,595 ---------312 ---------4,233 -------5,840
Jun-09-----1,012 ------1,249 ---------133 ---------2,394 -------6,827
Jul-09 -------21 ----------4 -----------4 ------------29 -------5,877
Aug-09 ------248 --------213 ----------37 -----------498 -------4,505
Sep-09 ----1,075 --------849 ---------133 ---------2,057 -------4,129
Total ----16,003 -----11,387 -------2,112 --------29,502 ------52,994

Oct-09 ----2,041 ------1,519 ---------264 ---------3,824 -------4,566
Nov-09 ----1,970 ------1,371 ---------237 ---------3,578 -------3,901
Dec-09 ----2,493 ------1,640 ---------263 ---------4,396 -------4,377
Jan-10 ----3,279 ------2,216 ---------308 ---------5,803 -------4,108
Feb-10 ----4,464 ------2,540 ---------499 ---------7,503 -------4,969
Mar-10 ----5,596 ------3,683 ---------571 ---------9,850 -------7,526
Apr-10 ----2,744 ------2,096 ---------264 ---------5,104 -------7,762
May-10 ----4,455 ------3,706 ---------486 ---------8,647 -------7,795
Jun-10 ----3,346 ------2,707 ---------365 ---------6,418 -------8,699
Jul-10 ----2,913 ------3,235 ---------336 ---------6,484 -------7,130
Aug-10 ----2,198 ------2,558 ---------287 ---------5,043 -------8,766
Sep-10 ----1,756 ------1,659 ---------172 ---------3,587 -------7,721
Total ----37,255 -----28,930 -------4,052 --------70,237 ------77,280

Oct-10 ----1,940 ------2,136 ---------231 ---------4,307 -------7,442
Nov-10 ----2,796 ------3,045 ---------350 ---------6,191 -------7,839
Dec-10 ----3,316 ------4,118 ---------423 ---------7,857 -------5,161
Jan-11 ----2,761 ------3,333 ---------447 ---------6,541 -------6,056
Feb-11 ----2,546 ------3,268 ---------383 ---------6,197 -------6,859
Mar-11 ----1,921 ------1,954 ---------279 ---------4,154 -------6,672(Estimated)
Total ----15,280 -----17,854 -------2,113 --------35,274 ------40,029

NOTE: Since i do not have data for Oct08-Nov08 & Mar11 i140 receipts, i extrapolated the data. Also PERM certification to i140 receipt there will be time lag but we are only
taking the rolling window so the numbers before and the numbers after will cancel the effect. And also I140 Receipts ~= PERM approvals +EB1i140 (since EB2-NIW % is very less)


From FY 2009 data EB1 i140 Receipts = 52,994 - 29,502 = 23,494 (FY 2009 EB1485 approvals = 40,979, translates to 18,627 EB1-i140)
Considering higher EB1-i140 denial rate(~15-20%?) the numbers almost match for FY2009

From FY 2010 data EB1 i140 Receipts = 77,280 - 70,237 = 7,043 (FY 2010 EB1485 approvals = 41,026, translates to 18,648 EB1-i140)

This translates to 70% drop in EB1(i140) applications from 2009 to 2010.

From FY 2011(Q1+Q2) data EB1 i140 Receipts = 40,029 - 35,274 = 4,755 - This translates to 60% drop in EB1 compared to 2009

and we can see huge jump in PERM cases all across the board, averaging about 6k per-month from Q1&Q2 2011 !

But the question i am not finding answer is,
If EB1 (i140)dropped by 70% from FY 2009 to FY 2010 then how come EB1 i485 approvals in 2010 are higher than in 2009?


FY 2010:
ROW,M&P EB2(i485) approvals = 27,406 ( = 12,520 (i140/PERM certifications))
ROW,M&P PERM certifications = 37,255
Subtracting EB2 PERM approvals(=i140) from the total leaves us with(=ROW EB3?)=24,735 ,if this is correct means ROW,M&P EB2 = 33% of ROW,M&P PERM approvals?

[kd2008]

Veni,

It simply shows how unreliable USCIS data really is! :-)

[veni001]

kd2008,
Looks its not ready down load yet!
I can incorporate it to my table once i am able to download.
Thanks

[veni001]

Kd2008,
:)
Let's see what the experts to say!

[qesehmk]

Veni

Once again good job. Your other format was great. Is it possible to keep it same and incorporate Q2 labor data?

Regarding your question below ... I ahve the same question. Teh answer it seems is ... that receipt of I-140 and approval of 485 are time lagged. So although 2010 saw less receipts ... it could still be hit with 2009 unadjudicated 485s.

p.s. - a Minor correction / question. Wouldn't EB4-5 also file I-140? So the difference is really EB1-4-5. Right?






But the question i am not finding answer is,
If EB1 (i140)dropped by 70% from FY 2009 to FY 2010 then how come EB1 i485 approvals in 2010 are higher than in 2009?

[kd2008]

For EB-5 and 4 there is no I-140 filing. EB-5 does I-536 and EB-4 does I-360.

[qesehmk]

KD Thanks for clarifying.
For EB-5 and 4 there is no I-140 filing. EB-5 does I-536 and EB-4 does I-360.

[veni001]

Veni

Once again good job. Your other format was great. Is it possible to keep it same and incorporate Q2 labor data?

Regarding your question below ... I have the same question. the answer it seems is ... that receipt of I-140 and approval of 485 are time lagged. So although 2010 saw less receipts ... it could still be hit with 2009 unadjudicated 485s.

p.s. - a Minor correction / question. Wouldn't EB4-5 also file I-140? So the difference is really EB1-4-5. Right?

Q,
Kd2008 is correct, Only EB1-3 need i140. 2011Q2PERM link is not working, will update the table once i am able download the data.

As far as your answer, we are taking the rolling window. For example 10-01-2010 inventory show about 8k EB1485 pending (=3.5k EB1-i140) these are FY 2010 application but will be adjudicated in FY 2011. We can expect the same number from FY 2009 to FY 2010 and FY 2008 to FY 2009 and the net effect is neutral! Since EB1 is always current this number shouldn't be high.

Even if we off sett 4k EB1-i140 for this, still there is a huge gap between EB1 approvals and EB1485 approvals in FY 2010??

[veni001]

Not sure this is pure coincidence or what? but always similar posts pop up at this blog (http://us-non-immigrants.blogspot.com/2011/04/people-who-missed-boat-pwmb-during-july.html) right after we post here. They broke-it down to VB cut-off dates for each month!

Note: We posted PWMB for PD2007 here on April 25,2011, and their post is dated April 28, 2011.:)

[qesehmk]

Immitation is the best form of flattery.

There is another chinese blog mittabs or something. They used to copy and publish the entire header from our thread each time I updated the header. So that's good. One can complain that one receive the credit or mention somewhere. But I can live with it.



Not sure this is pure coincidence or what? but always similar posts pop up at this blog (http://us-non-immigrants.blogspot.com/2011/04/people-who-missed-boat-pwmb-during-july.html) right after we post here. They broke-it down to VB cut-off dates for each month!

Note: We posted PWMB for PD2007 here on April 25,2011, and their post is dated April 28, 2011.:)

[anuran]

I've seen that forum, mitbbs. It actually makes interesting reading when you combine it with google translate.

Just today morning, when I looked at the us-non-immigrants, I started wondering if I am dealing with the one and same person on both sites, but then the numbers as well as approach to presenting the results are quite different. It could be mere coincidence too that a few have decided at the same time to look into the perm data for more insight. Good Day.

[Spectator]

Veni,

The above table is simply amazing. I have a favor to ask of you. Could you please build similar table each for India and China? If its already been done could you please let me know the link?

Thanks!
kd2008,

Here you go.


INDIA ---- FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 Q1 -- CY Total
2005 -------- 393 ------ 27 ------- 5 ------- 1 ---------- 0 ------- 426
2006 ----- 11,461 ----- 108 ------ 54 ------ 11 ---------- 1 ---- 11,635
2007 ----- 12,719 --- 8,335 ----- 962 --- 1,005 --------- 25 ---- 23,046
2008 ---------- 0 --- 8,099 -- 10,358 --- 3,702 -------- 679 ---- 22,838
2009 ---------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 8 -- 15,054 --------- 92 ---- 15,154
2010 ---------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 --- 9,157 ------ 8,502 ---- 17,659
Total ---- 24,573 -- 16,569 -- 11,387 -- 28,930 ------ 9,299 ---- 90,758


CHINA ---- FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 Q1 -- CY Total
2005 -------- 186 ------- 8 ------- 0 ------- 0 ---------- 0 ------- 194
2006 ------ 3,053 ------ 39 ------ 16 ------- 3 ---------- 0 ----- 3,111
2007 ------ 3,607 --- 1,916 ----- 179 ----- 198 ---------- 3 ----- 5,903
2008 ---------- 0 --- 1,365 --- 1,915 ----- 666 -------- 109 ----- 4,055
2009 ---------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 2 --- 2,169 ---------- 9 ----- 2,180
2010 ---------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 --- 1,016 -------- 883 ----- 1,899
Total ----- 6,846 --- 3,328 --- 2,112 --- 4,052 ------ 1,004 ---- 17,342


Ch & In. - FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 Q1 -- CY Total
2005 -------- 579 ------ 35 ------- 5 ------- 1 ---------- 0 ------- 620
2006 ----- 14,514 ----- 147 ------ 70 ------ 14 ---------- 1 ---- 14,746
2007 ----- 16,326 -- 10,251 --- 1,141 --- 1,203 --------- 28 ---- 28,949
2008 ---------- 0 --- 9,464 -- 12,273 --- 4,368 -------- 788 ---- 26,893
2009 ---------- 0 ------- 0 ------ 10 -- 17,223 -------- 101 ---- 17,334
2010 ---------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 -- 10,173 ------ 9,385 ---- 19,558
Total ---- 31,419 -- 19,897 -- 13,499 -- 32,982 ----- 10,303 --- 108,100

Hope that is what you wanted.

[Spectator]

Here's the breakdown for Approved cases:

Country/Grp - 2011 Q1 -- 2011 Q2 -- 2011 H1 -- 2010 H1
CHINA --------- 1,006 ---- 1,109 - -- 2,115 ---- 2,142
INDIA --------- 9,275 ---- 8,555 --- 17,830 --- 12,969
MEXICO ---------- 709 ------ 661 -- - 1,370 ---- 1,644
PHILIPPINES ----- 745 ------ 501 - -- 1,246 ---- 1,762
ROW ----------- 6,577 ---- 6,066 --- 12,643 --- 16,437
Grand Total -- 18,312 --- 16,892 --- 35,204 --- 34,954

Total approvals are similar to last year, but India represents a bigger %.

[qesehmk]

Spec

Don't you think that's very strong demand for ROW+M+P EB2?

As you said earlier .. I would be more cautious than optimistic.


Here's the breakdown for Approved cases:

Country/Grp - 2011 Q1 -- 2011 Q2 -- 2011 H1 -- 2010 H1
CHINA --------- 1,006 ---- 1,109 - -- 2,115 ---- 2,142
INDIA --------- 9,275 ---- 8,555 --- 17,830 --- 12,969
MEXICO ---------- 709 ------ 661 -- - 1,370 ---- 1,644
PHILIPPINES ----- 745 ------ 501 - -- 1,246 ---- 1,762
ROW ----------- 6,577 ---- 6,066 --- 12,643 --- 16,437
Grand Total -- 18,312 --- 16,892 --- 35,204 --- 34,954

Total approvals are similar to last year, but India represents a bigger %.

[Spectator]

Spec

Don't you think that's very strong demand for ROW+M+P EB2?

As you said earlier .. I would be more cautious than optimistic.

Q,

Since you ask, frankly it worries me - a lot.

Knowing that there is a lag time from PERM approval to I-140 and I-485 approval, here is the situation if we took PERM approvals for the last half of FY2010 and the first half of FY2011.

County/Grp - 2010 H2 -- 2011 H1 - Rolling Yr
CHINA -------- 1,910 ---- 2,115------- 4,025
INDIA ------- 15,961 --- 17,830------ 33,791
MEXICO ------- 1,662 ---- 1,370 ------ 3,032
PHILIPPINES -- 1,543 ---- 1,246------- 2,789
ROW --------- 14,207 --- 12,643------ 26,850
TOTAL ------- 35,283 --- 35,204------ 70,487

ROW-M-P ----- 17,412--- 15,259 ------ 32,671

It only gets worse if the lag is made 9 months.

County/Grp - Q2-4 2010 -- Q1 2011 -- Rolling Yr
ROW-M-P ------- 30,751 ---- 8,031 ------ 38,782

At the moment, I can't understand why Trackitt would not reflect such high numbers. Maybe I am missing something.

[qesehmk]

Spec
Trackitt is in line with this trend in its PERM tracker.
Teddy keeps looking at the 485 tracker which shows YoY reduction in approvals. Teddy correct me if i am wrong.

I am feeling that with this trend EB2 ROW will yield the same numbers as last year (do you remember what that was?).

So if there were to be any upside to last year it must come from EB1. Of that 12K almost 6-7K will go towards covering hte quota reduction this year. But that still leaves 5K extra compared to last years SOFAD. Last year total NET SOFAD to EB2IC was 27K? Is that right? So this year it will be 33K ... which barely brings it to Mar 2007. Again .... I may be off by a month here and there.


Q,
At the moment, I can't understand why Trackitt would not reflect such high numbers. Maybe I am missing something.

[Spectator]

Spec
Trackitt is in line with this trend in its PERM tracker.
Teddy keeps looking at the 485 tracker which shows YoY reduction in approvals. Teddy correct me if i am wrong.

I am feeling that with this trend EB2 ROW will yield the same numbers as last year (do you remember what that was?).

So if there were to be any upside to last year it must come from EB1. Of that 12K almost 6-7K will go towards covering hte quota reduction this year. But that still leaves 5K extra compared to last years SOFAD. Last year total NET SOFAD to EB2IC was 27K? Is that right? So this year it will be 33K ... which barely brings it to Mar 2007. Again .... I may be off by a month here and there.

Spillover to IC last year was 20,434.
7% was 3,016, so SOFAD was 26,466

Last year :
ROW = 24,427
Mexico = 817
Philippines = 2,162
Total = 27,406

ROW-M-P allocation was 43,088-6,032 = 37,056 so FA from ROW-M-P was 9,650, made up of:

ROW - 6,597
Mexico - 2,199
Philippines - 854
Total - 9,650

This year, of course, 7% is 2,803 and the ROW-M-P allocation is 34,434.

[qesehmk]

Thanks Spec.

So lets hope ROW consumption this year for EB2 stays in line with last year or less PLUS EB1 provides the upside that CO has indicated is there.

Those two together will push us around the border of Q1/Q2.


Spillover to IC last year was 20,434.
7% was 3,016, so SOFAD was 26,466

Last year :
ROW = 24,427
Mexico = 817
Philippines = 2,162
Total = 27,406

ROW-M-P allocation was 43,088-6,032 = 37,056 so FA from ROW-M-P was 9,650, made up of:

ROW - 6,597
Mexico - 2,199
Philippines - 854
Total - 9,650

This year, of course, 7% is 2,803 and the ROW-M-P allocation is 34,434.

[gcwait2007]

Q/ Spec & Others,

So the SOFAD summation on conservative basis is as follows:

EB1 will provide minimum 12K

EB2 ROW-M-P will provide 34,434 - 27,406 =7028 ~ 7K

EB5 will provide 7854-1880 = 5974 ~ 6K

Total SOFAD on conservative basis = 25K.

I am not really happy to calculate this way :(

There are upgrades and then PWMB.

However I am prepared to accept whatever I cannot change and destiny happens...

[qesehmk]

Here is 1 thing that may make you a bit happier. There is almost 6K EB2IC quota missing from your numbers. So the SOFAD will be 30-31K.



Q/ Spec & Others,

So the SOFAD summation on conservative basis is as follows:

EB1 will provide minimum 12K

EB2 ROW-M-P will provide 34,434 - 27,406 =7028 ~ 7K

EB5 will provide 7854-1880 = 5974 ~ 6K

Total SOFAD on conservative basis = 25K.

I am not really happy to calculate this way :(

There are upgrades and then PWMB.

However I am prepared to accept whatever I cannot change and destiny happens...

[soggadu]

Here is 1 thing that may make you a bit happier. There is almost 6K EB2IC quota missing from your numbers. So the SOFAD will be 30-31K.

Guru's,

Why are the predictions so gloomy....

I think EB1 is going to give us around 24K (optimistic) and around 20K realistic SOFAD right...

And from specs numbers there is a decrease of 4K for EB2 ROW from last year so that means 9K + 4K = 13K from Eb2 ROW

EB4/5 will be same/better than last year which adds another 7-8K
total is around 20+13+7= 40K spill over right.... oh ya 6K from IC which makes it even sweet 46K ....

[anuran]

That is it, soggadu. I am really betting on EB1 to be >20k. We will get a 35k SO. I know Q and other are being conservative especially after seeing the perm data. But that is only going to affect after May'07. Therefore we will make it to April'07. Initially I wanted it to be August'07. Well April is fair enough and it is a girl's name. :)

[soggadu]

That is it, soggadu. I am really betting on EB1 to be >20k. We will get a 35k SO. I know Q and other are being conservative especially after seeing the perm data. But that is only going to affect after May'07. Therefore we will make it to April'07. Initially I wanted it to be August'07. Well April is fair enough and it is a girl's name. :)

thats so true... when u compared april with girl... i remembered a friend of mine emailed me when huricane rita was hitting houston( it was just after katrina..i used to live there then) that... dude run from houston, when they say rita is coming...dont stay there thinking a new girl is visiting town... it was funny at that time during the choatic journey of 13 hrs from houston to austin ( 140 odd miles)....

anyway... i positively feel that the dates are going to hit Dec 07 and then retrogress... now dont jump on me... its my feeling and i know i dont hv numbers to prove... hope for the best and leave the rest... live life king size... hope we all have a great friday....

[Spectator]

For the sale of completeness, here is the analysis of the PWD data based on the minimum education and experience required.


Min Education ----------------- No. ---- % --- % Education
EB2
Doctorate(PhD) -------------- 1,828 --- 3.94% ---- 5.56%
Master's ------------------- 19,254 -- 41.54% --- 58.56%
Bachelor's + 5 -------------- 9,935 -- 21.43% --- 30.22%
Other Degree (JD, MD, etc.) - 1,862 --- 4.02% ---- 5.66%
EB2Total ------------------- 32,879 -- 70.93% -- 100.00%

EB3
Bachelor's ------------------ 8,742 -- 18.86% --- 64.89%
Other Degree (JD, MD, etc.) --- 162 --- 0.35% ---- 1.20%
Associate's ------------------- 636 --- 1.37% ---- 4.72%
High School/GED --------------- 714 --- 1.54% ---- 5.30%
None ------------------------ 3,219 --- 6.94% --- 23.89%
EB3 Total ------------------ 13,473 -- 29.07% -- 100.00%

Grand Total---------------- 46,352 - 100.00%

I don't think it tells us anything new. The overall % split between EB2 and EB3 has remained about the same over the last year.

As we have discussed earlier, different Countries have different individual EB2/EB3 splits, ranging from probably India having most EB2 to Mexico having least. Country data is not part of the PWD data.

Since we don't know these, the utility of the data is limited.

[anuran]

soggadu: I am not sure about retrogression in an already retrogressed category. But there is a good chance that CIS might be surprised by a huge influx of applicants, that the dates might remain static for a long time. By definition, remaining static is also retrogression because time stops for none.

[kd2008]

Another thing to remember about PERM Q2 2011 data is that there were no approvals from March in that data. DOL has just not begun to process March applications after a hiatus of nearly 7 weeks. If you look at trackitt, the number of applications jump massively in March. Sorry make it so dreadful. But this is just the reality.

[Spectator]

Another thing to remember about PERM Q2 2011 data is that there were no approvals from March in that data. DOL has just not begun to process March applications after a hiatus of nearly 7 weeks. If you look at trackitt, the number of applications jump massively in March. Sorry make it so dreadful. But this is just the reality.
kd2008,

That is a good point, so I checked and you are correct. To put some figures to your thoughts, the following are Certifications in Q2 only. December 2010 received a further 965 Certifications in Q1 for a total of exactly 5,000. There is always something of a lag, but it does appear to be somewhat larger this time.


PD ------------ No. ---- %
Dec 2010 ---- 4,035 -- 61.38%
Jan 2011 ---- 4,029 -- 56.68%
Feb 2011 ---- 2,988 -- 42.04%
Mar 2011 ------- 91 --- 1.28%
Grand Total - 7,108 - 100.00%

Edit: Having checked back further, it appears that the number of December 2010 applications Certified in Q1 was the exception, rather than the rule. It probably reflects just how quickly PERM was being approved then. As processing times have returned to something more normal (although still fairly quick), the norm has been resumed, where very few last month submissions are also Certified in the same quarter.

[veni001]

kd2008,

That is a good point, so I checked and you are correct. To put some figures to your thoughts, the following are Certifications in Q2 only. December 2010 received a further 965 Certifications in Q1 for a total of exactly 5,000. There is always something of a lag, but it does appear to be somewhat larger this time.


PD ------------ No. ---- %
Dec 2010 ---- 4,035 -- 61.38%
Jan 2011 ---- 4,029 -- 56.68%
Feb 2011 ---- 2,988 -- 42.04%
Mar 2011 ------- 91 --- 1.28%
Grand Total - 7,108 - 100.00%

Edit: Having checked back further, it appears that the number of December 2010 applications Certified in Q1 was the exception, rather than the rule. It probably reflects just how quickly PERM was being approved then. As processing times have returned to something more normal (although still fairly quick), the norm has been resumed, where very few last month submissions are also Certified in the same quarter.

Spec,
Not sure why it is different here is my breakdown from FY 2011 Q2 Data?

- Month -- ROW(2&3) ---EBI(2&3) ---EBC(2&3) --Monthly Total-- i140 Receipts
Oct-10 ----1,940 ------2,136 ---------231 ---------4,307 -------7,442
Nov-10 ----2,796 ------3,045 ---------350 ---------6,191 -------7,839
Dec-10 ----3,316 ------4,118 ---------423 ---------7,857 -------5,161
Jan-11 ----2,761 ------3,333 ---------447 ---------6,541 -------6,056
Feb-11 ----2,546 ------3,268 ---------383 ---------6,197 -------6,859
Mar-11 ----1,921 ------1,954 ---------279 ---------4,154 -------6,672(Estimated)
Total ----15,280 -----17,854 -------2,113 --------35,274 ------40,029

P.S: I have updated table in my previous post.

[gcwait2007]

Here is 1 thing that may make you a bit happier. There is almost 6K EB2IC quota missing from your numbers. So the SOFAD will be 30-31K.

Thank you, Q.


Today's wisdom: Data is like mashed potato. If you make flat of mashed potato, it is called Burger. If you make globe of it, it is called Bonda :D

In tamil language: Thatti potta vadai, orutti potta bonda :D

[veni001]

Spec,
Not sure why it is different here is my breakdown from FY 2011 Q2 Data?
-------
-------


Spec,kd2008,
Didn't read it correct first time, your post is based on PD Month and mine is monthly adjudications!:)

[gcwait2007]

Q/ Spec & Others,

So the SOFAD summation on conservative basis is as follows:

EB1 will provide minimum 12K

EB2 ROW-M-P will provide 34,434 - 27,406 =7028 ~ 7K

EB5 will provide 7854-1880 = 5974 ~ 6K

Total SOFAD on conservative basis = 25K.

I am not really happy to calculate this way :(

There are upgrades and then PWMB.

However I am prepared to accept whatever I cannot change and destiny happens...


Guru's,

Why are the predictions so gloomy....

I think EB1 is going to give us around 24K (optimistic) and around 20K realistic SOFAD right...

And from specs numbers there is a decrease of 4K for EB2 ROW from last year so that means 9K + 4K = 13K from Eb2 ROW

EB4/5 will be same/better than last year which adds another 7-8K
total is around 20+13+7= 40K spill over right.... oh ya 6K from IC which makes it even sweet 46K ....


Every thing is in mind.

I just expressed the unconscious fears in my mind at that time.

Probably I was not in good mood at that time.

Sorry about that...

Thanks,
gcw07

[veni001]

ROW PERM Certifications (FY/CY Matrix)-- Updated with FY2011 Q1&Q2 data

CY-PD-- FY-2007-- FY-2008 -- FY-2009 -- FY-2010 - Q1&Q2-2011 --- CY Total
2005 ---2,318 -----186 ---------21 ----------12 ---------1 ---------2,538
2006 --24,695 -----754 --------254 ----------70 ---------4 --------25,777
2007 --26,680 --14,473 --------661 -------1,523 --------44 --------44,381
2008 --- N/A ---13,895 -----14,059 ------ 6,574 -----2,451 --------36,979
2009 --- N/A ----- N/A ----------8 ------21,199 -------737 --------21,944
2010 --- N/A ----- N/A --------N/A -------7,877 -----9,232 --------17,109
2011 --- N/A ----- N/A --------N/A ---------N/A -----2,811 --------14,387
Total -53,693 --29,308 ----16,003 -------37,255 ----15,280

Columns show FY PERM approvals, rows show PD by CY.

Q& Spec,
As we can see ROW 2011(Q1+Q2) PERM had lot of cleanup of CY2010 and prior year cases, not sure what the Prevailing Wage data for 2008 & 2010 shows, similar to FY 2011?

[qesehmk]

GCW ...

If you insert line breaks ... you can turn your thought into a haiku as well :-)


Thank you, Q.


Today's wisdom: Data is like mashed potato. If you make flat of mashed potato, it is called Burger. If you make globe of it, it is called Bonda :D

[qesehmk]

Veni

I love this format. Thanks a ton.

You are right about 2010 PERM surge. However mind you .... in 2011 we will not only see 15280*2 but also the remnant of the surge from 2010 in the I140 and 485 line. Again ... hate to rain on this parade ... but you know what .... knowledge is liberating ...
The more I think about it .... the more our fate hinges on what CO really meant by 12K extra visas from EB1? Did he mean 12K half year ... full year ... including EB5 .. or excluding EB5!!! Who knows !!


ROW PERM Certifications (FY/CY Matrix)-- Updated with FY2011 Q1&Q2 data

CY-PD-- FY-2007-- FY-2008 -- FY-2009 -- FY-2010 - Q1&Q2-2011 --- CY Total
2005 ---2,318 -----186 ---------21 ----------12 ---------1 ---------2,538
2006 --24,695 -----754 --------254 ----------70 ---------4 --------25,777
2007 --26,680 --14,473 --------661 -------1,523 --------44 --------44,381
2008 --- N/A ---13,895 -----14,059 ------ 6,574 -----2,451 --------36,979
2009 --- N/A ----- N/A ----------8 ------21,199 -------737 --------21,944
2010 --- N/A ----- N/A --------N/A -------7,877 -----9,232 --------17,109
2011 --- N/A ----- N/A --------N/A ---------N/A -----2,811 --------14,387
Total -53,693 --29,308 ----16,003 -------37,255 ----15,280

Columns show FY PERM approvals, rows show PD by CY.

Q& Spec,
As we can see ROW 2011(Q1+Q2) PERM had lot of cleanup of CY2010 and prior year cases, not sure what the Prevailing Wage data for 2008 & 2010 shows, similar to FY 2011?

[veni001]

For the sale of completeness, here is the analysis of the PWD data based on the minimum education and experience required.


Min Education ----------------- No. ---- % --- % Education
EB2
Doctorate(PhD) -------------- 1,828 --- 3.94% ---- 5.56%
Master's ------------------- 19,254 -- 41.54% --- 58.56%
Bachelor's + 5 -------------- 9,935 -- 21.43% --- 30.22%
Other Degree (JD, MD, etc.) - 1,862 --- 4.02% ---- 5.66%
EB2Total ------------------- 32,879 -- 70.93% -- 100.00%

EB3
Bachelor's ------------------ 8,742 -- 18.86% --- 64.89%
Other Degree (JD, MD, etc.) --- 162 --- 0.35% ---- 1.20%
Associate's ------------------- 636 --- 1.37% ---- 4.72%
High School/GED --------------- 714 --- 1.54% ---- 5.30%
None ------------------------ 3,219 --- 6.94% --- 23.89%
EB3 Total ------------------ 13,473 -- 29.07% -- 100.00%

Grand Total---------------- 46,352 - 100.00%

I don't think it tells us anything new. The overall % split between EB2 and EB3 has remained about the same over the last year.

As we have discussed earlier, different Countries have different individual EB2/EB3 splits, ranging from probably India having most EB2 to Mexico having least. Country data is not part of the PWD data.

Since we don't know these, the utility of the data is limited.

Spec,
Good work!

Few points to make a note of... while considering PW data to draw conclusions at PERM certifications
1. We know no one want to apply in EB3 anymore...... this is FACT! unless they don't have a choice.
2. Since we saw 60-70% decline across the board for EB1, those cases will reflect in EB2(new cases)--> PW Data reflect this.
3. Any I&C supposed to be EB1 to EB2 cases will not affect SOFAD ,at least for now! ( what is this % )
Note: I&C account for 50% of PERM certifications(average)
4. As we have seen from our previous analysis 80% EBI&C PERMs on average are EB2, but what percentage of these are new Vs Porting?
5. Which means about 55% of ROW PERM certifications are EB2 (I am still not able get good handle on this!)

[veni001]

Veni

I love this format. Thanks a ton.

You are right about 2010 PERM surge. However mind you .... in 2011 we will not only see 15280*2 but also the remnant of the surge from 2010 in the I140 and 485 line. Again ... hate to rain on this parade ... but you know what .... knowledge is liberating ...
The more I think about it .... the more our fate hinges on what CO really meant by 12K extra visas from EB1? Did he mean 12K half year ... full year ... including EB5 .. or excluding EB5!!! Who knows !!

Thank you Q,
Please see few points i brought up to consider from my reply to Spec's Q1&Q2 2011 PW data analysis.

[gcwait2007]

The more I think about it .... the more our fate hinges on what CO really meant by 12K extra visas from EB1? Did he mean 12K half year ... full year ... including EB5 .. or excluding EB5!!! Who knows !!

What?????? You are crashing many people's positive thoughts, high energy and dreams! (that includes mine :D)

Some where I read: AILA has reported that the EB-2 cut-off dates in Visa Bulletin in May 2011 may progress ahead substantially because of large unused EB-1 numbers since October 2010 since it has about 12,000 unused EB-2 numbers. I am not able to access that AILA document to validate my point unfortunately.

[TeddyKoochu]

Q/ Spec & Others,

So the SOFAD summation on conservative basis is as follows:

EB1 will provide minimum 12K

EB2 ROW-M-P will provide 34,434 - 27,406 =7028 ~ 7K

EB5 will provide 7854-1880 = 5974 ~ 6K

Total SOFAD on conservative basis = 25K.

I am not really happy to calculate this way :(

There are upgrades and then PWMB.

However I am prepared to accept whatever I cannot change and destiny happens...


Here is 1 thing that may make you a bit happier. There is almost 6K EB2IC quota missing from your numbers. So the SOFAD will be 30-31K.

GCW, This in fact is a very good and simplistic summary of the current situation minus any hifi calculation.
- I still hope that since the 12k news came from the man himself there is credibility about it with still another half year to go where definitely there should be no explosion in EB1 applications 12K definitely looks very safe.
- The EB2 ROW SOFAD has been calculated by many ways most of the approaces have reached more than 8k however many people do believe that we may not see any SOFAD from EB2 ROW at all. According to the trackitt trend 8K is a conservative call.
- On Eb5 also your numbers are fairly conservative.
- What’s missing is the I/C regular cap, as Q points out which is 5.6K for this year. SOFAD by definition means visa numbers from all sources, since EB2 is so spillover dependant we have kind of forgotten the regular cap and thanks to porting being equal to the annual cap (Worst case scenario) its effect has /will become minimal.
Since all you assumptions are either conservative or at best centrist I would say that 30K is a fairly conservative figure. This would put the date at around 01-FEB-2007.

[TeddyKoochu]

What?????? You are crashing many people's positive thoughts, high energy and dreams! (that includes mine :D)

Some where I read: AILA has reported that the EB-2 cut-off dates in Visa Bulletin in May 2011 may progress ahead substantially because of large unused EB-1 numbers since October 2010 since it has about 12,000 unused EB-2 numbers. I am not able to access that AILA document to validate my point unfortunately.


Veni

I love this format. Thanks a ton.

You are right about 2010 PERM surge. However mind you .... in 2011 we will not only see 15280*2 but also the remnant of the surge from 2010 in the I140 and 485 line. Again ... hate to rain on this parade ... but you know what .... knowledge is liberating ...
The more I think about it .... the more our fate hinges on what CO really meant by 12K extra visas from EB1? Did he mean 12K half year ... full year ... including EB5 .. or excluding EB5!!! Who knows !!

Guys I believe that the June bulletin will definitely be a litmus test on this. In the may bulletin we saw 4.5K numbers being allocated, now if we see another 4-4.5K in June then we can be fairly sure that the 12K is EB1. I think the May parade was really halted by the overhype on porting and the new inventory is delayed because they seem to be applying the ported cases to the rigt category. Lets hope for the best. I certainly hope that there will be a minimum of 1 month’s movement in June. Now to give you an idea of the Kazarian memo impact people with 35 publications are getting RFE's while until last year people with 5 publications would have a smooth sailing.

[qesehmk]

Sorry ... guys here is a correction.
The numbers will certainly be at least equal to last years SOFAD. Probably some more. Upto 31. However if it has to be more than that then EB1 needs to cough up 12K more in second half. Now that - 31+12 = 43K SOFAD in my opinion is the absolute top line i.e. most optimistic forecast sufficient to make July 2007 current.

The downside to this is ...
EB2 ROW demand stays same as last year.
EB1 12K number was full year and included EB5.

That would still mean 24K SOFAD of which 6K could go to PWMB + porting. So 18K should still bring EB2IC to Oct 2006. But as I said that's the pessimistic scenario. But as you can see the real unknown at this point is not EB2ROW - given all the spectacular work that veni and Spec and others have done. The real unknown is EB1 itself and what that 12K is really ... full year / half year / EB5 in or out?

So take your pick and move date from oct 2006 through Jul 2007.

Again sorry ... don't really mean to dampen anybody's spirit..

Have a great weekend!!!


Thank you Q,
Please see few points i brought up to consider from my reply to Spec's Q1&Q2 2011 PW data analysis.


What?????? You are crashing many people's positive thoughts, high energy and dreams! (that includes mine :D)

Some where I read: AILA has reported that the EB-2 cut-off dates in Visa Bulletin in May 2011 may progress ahead substantially because of large unused EB-1 numbers since October 2010 since it has about 12,000 unused EB-2 numbers. I am not able to access that AILA document to validate my point unfortunately.

[gcwait2007]

This would put the date at around 01-FEB-2007.

Mine is 20th Feb 2007.

I am a firm believer of destiny.

If there is destiny that I should get the GC by Sept 2011, no one can stop it.

If it is otherwise, then all I wish that I should be prepared in advance so that so that I don't feel disappointed later and spending a infuriated year ahead...

[qesehmk]

Now to give you an idea of the Kazarian memo impact people with 35 publications are getting RFE's while until last year people with 5 publications would have a smooth sailing.

Teddy thanks.. Good piece of info.

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy thanks.. Good piece of info.

Q here is the link you can have a first hand account.
- http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/i140/683206889/rfe-for-35-total-papers-with-22-first-author

[Spectator]

Q here is the link you can have a first hand account.
- http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/i140/683206889/rfe-for-35-total-papers-with-22-first-author
Teddy,

I read that one too. I think the key point might be there are only 54 citations on 22 papers. That raises doubts on International Acclaim and the impact of the work.

Have you noticed also that (TSC in particular) have approved a lot of EB1 cases over the past week or so.

EB2-ROW (No M-P) continues to rise and now stands at 94% of last year's total at this point of the year.

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy,

I read that one too. I think the key point might be there are only 54 citations on 22 papers. That raises doubts on International Acclaim and the impact of the work.

Have you noticed also that (TSC in particular) have approved a lot of EB1 cases over the past week or so.

EB2-ROW (No M-P) continues to rise and now stands at 94% of last year's total at this point of the year.

Here is another one. The point is until last year these cases would have seen straight approvals.
http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/i140/640912941/eb1b-rfe-from-nsc-please-help

I will research the Trackitt EB2 Trend and write soon.

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy,

EB2-ROW (No M-P) continues to rise and now stands at 94% of last year's total at this point of the year.


Spec
Teddy keeps looking at the 485 tracker which shows YoY reduction in approvals. Teddy correct me if i am wrong.

I am feeling that with this trend EB2 ROW will yield the same numbers as last year (do you remember what that was?).


@ spec, the current trend is 89%. I agree with you that its worsening.
@ q, I believe the situation has worsened we will get lesser SOFAD from EB2 ROW than last year. I have refined things a bit added an effectiveness factor based on last year's effectiveness for this method.

Details below.

Whole of FY 2010 ROW EB2 + NIW + MEX + PHL - 513 + 63 + 5 + 34 = 615
Whole of FY 2009 ROW EB2 + NIW + MEX + PHL - 720 + 80 + 7 + 43 = 850

So 2010 ROW consumption should be (615/850) * (40-5.5) = 25K.
2010 ROW SOFAD = 43.5 - 25 - 6 = 12.5K

Actual 2010 SOFAD from EB2 ROW was 9.5K so we should have a effectiveness factor which is ~ 75%.

Now

7 Months of FY 2011 ROW EB2 + NIW + MEX + PHL - 273 + 32 + 2 + 27 = 334
7 Months of FY 2010 ROW EB2 + NIW + MEX + PHL - 310 + 41 + 3 + 21 = 375

Current Rate = 89%.

Now EB2 ROW SOFAD would be

EB2 ROW + M + P consumption 2010 = 43.5 -9.5 -6 = 28K.
EB2 ROW SOFAD this year = 40-5.5- (89/100 * 28) = 9.5K

Multiplying with the effectiveness factor of 75% this would be 7K.

[Spectator]

Teddy,

I think this year is particularly difficult for forecasting; a number of factors have changed, so it's good to try to use different and innovative methods.

I have 3 or 4 different simulations running for both EB1 and EB2-ROW, some of which give quite different results to my old method.

Really, I set them up to compare after the FY has finished and we have actual numbers. I can then assess if one or other copes better than a traditional analysis.

Until then, I treat the results as interesting, but too uncertain to discuss in public.

[gcwait2007]

Teddy,

I think this year is particularly difficult for forecasting; a number of factors have changed, so it's good to try to use different and innovative methods.

I have 3 or 4 different simulations running for both EB1 and EB2-ROW, some of which give quite different results to my old method.

Really, I set them up to compare after the FY has finished and we have actual numbers. I can then assess if one or other copes better than a traditional analysis.

Until then, I treat the results as interesting, but too uncertain to discuss in public.

The more we think and guesstimate about SOFAD with the available data, we get anxious and unconscious fears of lesser SOFAD.

The best option is to take a break and wait for new data (I-485 pending inventory list as of 04/01/2011) to come out. The new list may provide a closer perspective.

[veni001]

Spec,
Good work!

Few points to make a note of... while considering PW data to draw conclusions at PERM certifications
1. We know no one want to apply in EB3 anymore...... this is FACT! unless they don't have a choice.
2. Since we saw 60-70% decline across the board for EB1, those cases will reflect in EB2(new cases)--> PW Data reflect this.
3. Any I&C supposed to be EB1 to EB2 cases will not affect PD movement from net SOFAD ,at least for now! ( what is this % )
Note: I&C account for 50% of PERM certifications(average)
4. As we have seen from our previous analysis 80% EBI&C PERMs on average are EB2, but what percentage of these are new Vs Porting?
5. Which means about 55% of ROW PERM certifications are EB2 (I am still not able get good handle on this!)


@ spec, the current trend is 89%. I agree with you that its worsening.
@ q, I believe the situation has worsened we will get lesser SOFAD from EB2 ROW than last year. I have refined things a bit added an effectiveness factor based on last year's effectiveness for this method.

Details below.

Whole of FY 2010 ROW EB2 + NIW + MEX + PHL - 513 + 63 + 5 + 34 = 615
Whole of FY 2009 ROW EB2 + NIW + MEX + PHL - 720 + 80 + 7 + 43 = 850

So 2010 ROW consumption should be (615/850) * (40-5.5) = 25K.
2010 ROW SOFAD = 43.5 - 25 - 6 = 12.5K

Actual 2010 SOFAD from EB2 ROW was 9.5K so we should have a effectiveness factor which is ~ 75%.

Now

7 Months of FY 2011 ROW EB2 + NIW + MEX + PHL - 273 + 32 + 2 + 27 = 334
7 Months of FY 2010 ROW EB2 + NIW + MEX + PHL - 310 + 41 + 3 + 21 = 375

Current Rate = 89%.

Now EB2 ROW SOFAD would be

EB2 ROW + M + P consumption 2010 = 43.5 -9.5 -6 = 28K.
EB2 ROW SOFAD this year = 40-5.5- (89/100 * 28) = 9.5K

Multiplying with the effectiveness factor of 75% this would be 7K.

Teddy,
Nice work, I agree ROW may not yield as much spillover as it did in FY 2010. But this is expected with the exponential drop in EB1 filings/approvals.

Comparing PERM data for 2010 & Q1+Q2 for 2011

-------------FY 2010 -------Q1&Q2 FY 2011----- %(Full-year)
ROW,MP ----37,225------------15,280 --------------82%
IND ---------28,930------------17,854 -------------123%
C -------------4,052 -------------2,113 -------------104%

1. Even though ROW PERM filings are less this year compared to FY 2010, % of EB2 is higher this year compared to last year, which means we are definitely not going to get as much Spillover as we have seen from ROW last year! this is given now.
2. If we offset increase in EB2I&C PERM for decrease in EB1I&C (resulting new EB2), means traditional & porting EB2I&C filings are more or less equal to FY 2010.
3. We have to revisit EB1 to account for full year Spillover to EB2(i would think this will be 20k+)
4. I am not expecting any change in EB4 or EB5 compared to FY 2010.

[qesehmk]

Teddy
I agree here. That's why I have two factors in my model
SYA - same year approval rate
R485 - ROW EB2 485 filings in 2011 as % of 2010 filings.



Multiplying with the effectiveness factor of 75% this would be 7K.


The more we think and guesstimate about SOFAD with the available data, we get anxious and unconscious fears of lesser SOFAD.

The best option is to take a break and wait for new data (I-485 pending inventory list as of 04/01/2011) to come out. The new list may provide a closer perspective.
GCW ... actually the PERM data that came out this week was something new. But yes I agree sometimes we can beat it to death and we could still turn out wrong!! So we might as well take a chill pill.

[anuran]

The best option is to take a break and wait for new data (I-485 pending inventory list as of 04/01/2011) to come out. The new list may provide a closer perspective.

If the inventory that is to come, is to be as of 04/01/2011, what are the chances that you will see an appreciable difference with respect to Jan'11 inventory. The Dec'09-Mar'10 inventory data showed that pending cases for India was down by 1132. And the cutoff dates moved by 3 months during that period. Keeping that in mind, and the fact that the cutoff dates for India did not budge during Jan'11-April'11, chances for any change in numbers for India in the new inventory is nil. In fact the pending cases might have appreciated. On the other hand, it might have some useful info for China. With respect to ROW, EB2-ROW being current, inventory data is of no use. Trackitt shows that CIS approved 12 EB2-I in April. All the approved petitions had PD in 2006 and older. There have been no approvals after 04/19. That may or may not mean that CIS has just about exhausted the annual quota for India EB2. All in all my contention is the if the inventory is dated 1st of April, then there will be no useful info for EB2-I.

[kd2008]

PERM audit processing has moved to Dec 2009. According to trackitt there are very few audits starting Jan 2010 and beyond. So going ahead we will be looking at new and porting demand mostly. This is good. We will be able to firm up the number of cases pending from 2006 till now in a pretty confident way.

[Spectator]

The more we think and guesstimate about SOFAD with the available data, we get anxious and unconscious fears of lesser SOFAD.

The best option is to take a break and wait for new data (I-485 pending inventory list as of 04/01/2011) to come out. The new list may provide a closer perspective.
I agree.

The information relating to PERM beyond July 2007 and PWMB in general was well worthwhile discussing.

Now, I will wait until (if ever) USCIS decide to publish the next Inventory.

In the meantime, I leave you all with a compilation of all the figures for CY Priority date PERM Approvals by FY of Approval. First, the individual Countries/Groups, followed by a summary for China+India and Mexico-Philippines-ROW.

In future, having these in a single post may prove useful.

All Certified PERM by Calendar Year of Receipt (PD) by FY of Approval

CHINA ----- FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 Q1-Q2 -- CY Total
2005 --------- 186 ------- 8 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------------- 0 ------- 194
2006 ------- 3,053 ------ 39 ------ 16 ------- 3 ------------- 0 ----- 3,111
2007 ------- 3,607 --- 1,916 ----- 179 ----- 198 ------------- 5 ----- 5,905
2008 ----------- 0 --- 1,365 --- 1,915 ----- 666 ----------- 188 ----- 4,134
2009 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 2 --- 2,169 ------------ 60 ----- 2,231
2010 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 --- 1,016 --------- 1,369 ----- 2,385
2011 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ----------- 493 ------- 493
Total ------ 6,846 --- 3,328 --- 2,112 --- 4,052 --------- 2,115 ---- 18,453


INDIA ----- FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 Q1-Q2 -- CY Total
2005 --------- 393 ------ 27 ------- 5 ------- 1 ------------- 0 ------- 426
2006 ------ 11,461 ----- 108 ------ 54 ------ 11 ------------- 1 ---- 11,635
2007 ------ 12,719 --- 8,335 ----- 962 --- 1,005 ------------ 43 ---- 23,064
2008 ----------- 0 --- 8,099 -- 10,358 --- 3,702 --------- 1,193 ---- 23,352
2009 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 8 -- 15,054 ----------- 940 ---- 16,002
2010 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 --- 9,157 -------- 11,849 ---- 21,006
2011 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 --------- 3,804 ----- 3,804
Total ----- 24,573 -- 16,569 -- 11,387 -- 28,930 -------- 17,830 ---- 99,289


MEXICO ---- FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 Q1-Q2 -- CY Total
2005 --------- 403 ------ 32 ------- 3 ------- 3 ------------- 0 ------- 441
2006 ------- 2,975 ----- 142 ------ 39 ------ 16 ------------- 2 ----- 3,174
2007 ------- 3,064 --- 1,409 ----- 141 ----- 126 ------------- 8 ----- 4,748
2008 ----------- 0 --- 1,861 ----- 591 ----- 878 ----------- 528 ----- 3,858
2009 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 1 --- 1,787 ------------ 73 ----- 1,861
2010 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ----- 496 ----------- 572 ----- 1,068
2011 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ----------- 187 ------- 187
Total ------ 6,442 --- 3,444 ----- 775 --- 3,306 --------- 1,370 ---- 15,337


PHIL. ----- FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 Q1-Q2 -- CY Total
2005 --------- 192 ------- 9 ------- 1 ------- 3 ------------- 0 ------- 205
2006 ------- 1,913 ------ 64 ------ 19 ------ 15 ------------- 0 ----- 2,011
2007 ------- 2,716 --- 1,519 ------ 99 ------ 84 ------------- 1 ----- 4,419
2008 ----------- 0 --- 1,403 --- 1,510 ----- 483 ----------- 145 ----- 3,541
2009 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 2 --- 1,986 ------------ 48 ----- 2,036
2010 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ----- 734 ----------- 833 ----- 1,567
2011 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ----------- 219 ------- 219
Total ------ 4,821 --- 2,995 --- 1,631 --- 3,305 --------- 1,246 ---- 13,998


ROW ------- FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 Q1-Q2 -- CY Total
2005 ------- 1,723 ----- 145 ------ 17 ------- 6 ------------- 1 ----- 1,892
2006 ------ 19,807 ----- 548 ----- 196 ------ 39 ------------- 2 ---- 20,592
2007 ------ 20,900 -- 11,545 --- 1,421 --- 1,313 ------------ 35 ---- 35,214
2008 ----------- 0 -- 10,631 -- 11,958 --- 5,213 --------- 1,769 ---- 29,571
2009 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 5 -- 17,426 ----------- 616 ---- 18,047
2010 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 --- 6,647 --------- 7,815 ---- 14,462
2011 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 --------- 2,405 ----- 2,405
Total ----- 42,430 -- 22,869-- 13,597 --- 30,644 -------- 12,643 --- 122,183


Ch & In. -- FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 Q1-Q2 -- CY Total
2005 --------- 579 ------ 35 ------- 5 ------- 1 ------------- 0 ------- 620
2006 ------ 14,514 ----- 147 ------ 70 ------ 14 ------------- 1 ---- 14,746
2007 ------ 16,326 -- 10,251 --- 1,141 --- 1,203 ------------ 48 ---- 28,969
2008 ----------- 0 --- 9,464 -- 12,273 --- 4,368 --------- 1,381 ---- 27,486
2009 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------ 10 -- 17,223 --------- 1,000 ---- 18,233
2010 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 -- 10,173 -------- 13,218 ---- 23,391
2011 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 --------- 4,297 ----- 4,297
Total ----- 31,419 -- 19,897 -- 13,499 -- 32,982 -------- 19,945 --- 117,742


ROW-M-P --- FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 Q1-Q2 -- CY Total
2005 ------- 2,318 ----- 186 ------ 21 ------ 12 ------------- 1 ----- 2,538
2006 ------ 24,695 ----- 754 ----- 254 ------ 70 ------------- 4 ---- 25,777
2007 ------ 26,680 -- 14,473 --- 1,661 --- 1,523 ------------ 44 ---- 44,381
2008 ----------- 0 -- 13,895 -- 14,059 --- 6,574 --------- 2,442 ---- 36,970
2009 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 8 -- 21,199 ----------- 737 ---- 21,944
2010 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 --- 7,877 --------- 9,220 ---- 17,097
2011 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 --------- 2,811 ----- 2,811
Total ----- 53,693 -- 29,308 -- 16,003 -- 37,255 -------- 15,259 --- 151,518

ALL ------- 85,112 -- 49,205 -- 29,502 -- 70,237 -------- 35,204 --- 269,260

The tables represent the FY (October to September) that PERM applications with Priority Date in a Calendar Year were Certified.

As an example, say you wanted to know the number of PERM for Indian applicants with a PD in 2007 Certified in FY2008. First go to the table for India, then the FY2008 column. Go down the column until you reach 2007. The resulting figure, 8,335, is the number of PERM with a PD of 2007 Certified in FY2008 for Indian applicants.

If you wanted to know the number of PERM with a PD of 2008 Certified to date, you would go down the first colum until yo reached 2008, then across to the last column "CY Total". For India, that would be 23,352.

To convert to numbers of I-485 applications, you would need to make your own assumption about denial rate at I-140 stage and the split between EB2 and EB3 applications. Additionally, you would need to allow a factor for number of I-485 applicants per I-140 approval (often 2.1 - 2.25 is used).

[veni001]

I agree.

The information relating to PERM beyond July 2007 and PWMB in general was well worthwhile discussing.

Now, I will wait until (if ever) USCIS decide to publish the next Inventory.

In the meantime, I leave you all with a compilation of all the figures for CY Priority date PERM Approvals by FY of Approval. First, the individual Countries/Groups, followed by a summary for China+India and Mexico-Philippines-ROW.

In future, having these in a single post may prove useful.

All Certified PERM by Calendar Year of Receipt (PD) by FY of Approval

CHINA ----- FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 H1 -- CY Total
2005 --------- 186 ------- 8 ------- 0 ------- 0 ---------- 0 ------- 194
2006 ------- 3,053 ------ 39 ------ 16 ------- 3 ---------- 0 ----- 3,111
2007 ------- 3,607 --- 1,916 ----- 179 ----- 198 ---------- 5 ----- 5,905
2008 ----------- 0 --- 1,365 --- 1,915 ----- 666 -------- 188 ----- 4,134
2009 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 2 --- 2,169 --------- 60 ----- 2,231
2010 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 --- 1,016 ------ 1,369 ----- 2,385
2011 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 -------- 493 ------- 493
Total ------ 6,846 --- 3,328 --- 2,112 --- 4,052 ------ 2,115 ---- 18,453


INDIA ----- FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 H1 -- CY Total
2005 --------- 393 ------ 27 ------- 5 ------- 1 ---------- 0 ------- 426
2006 ------ 11,461 ----- 108 ------ 54 ------ 11 ---------- 1 ---- 11,635
2007 ------ 12,719 --- 8,335 ----- 962 --- 1,005 --------- 43 ---- 23,064
2008 ----------- 0 --- 8,099 -- 10,358 --- 3,702 ------ 1,193 ---- 23,352
2009 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 8 -- 15,054 -------- 940 ---- 16,002
2010 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 --- 9,157 ----- 11,849 ---- 21,006
2011 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------ 3,804 ----- 3,804
Total ----- 24,573 -- 16,569 -- 11,387 -- 28,930 ----- 17,830 ---- 99,289


MEXICO ---- FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 H1 -- CY Total
2005 --------- 403 ------ 32 ------- 3 ------- 3 ---------- 0 ------- 441
2006 ------- 2,975 ----- 142 ------ 39 ------ 16 ---------- 2 ----- 3,174
2007 ------- 3,064 --- 1,409 ----- 141 ----- 126 ---------- 8 ----- 4,748
2008 ----------- 0 --- 1,861 ----- 591 ----- 878 -------- 528 ----- 3,858
2009 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 1 --- 1,787 --------- 73 ----- 1,861
2010 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ----- 496 -------- 572 ----- 1,068
2011 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 -------- 187 ------- 187
Total ------ 6,442 --- 3,444 ----- 775 --- 3,306 ------ 1,370 ---- 15,337


PHIL. ----- FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 H1 -- CY Total
2005 --------- 192 ------- 9 ------- 1 ------- 3 ---------- 0 ------- 205
2006 ------- 1,913 ------ 64 ------ 19 ------ 15 ---------- 0 ----- 2,011
2007 ------- 2,716 --- 1,519 ------ 99 ------ 84 ---------- 1 ----- 4,419
2008 ----------- 0 --- 1,403 --- 1,510 ----- 483 -------- 145 ----- 3,541
2009 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 2 --- 1,986 --------- 48 ----- 2,036
2010 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ----- 734 -------- 833 ----- 1,567
2011 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 -------- 219 ------- 219
Total ------ 4,821 --- 2,995 --- 1,631 --- 3,305 ------ 1,246 ---- 13,998


ROW ------- FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 H1 -- CY Total
2005 ------- 1,723 ----- 145 ------ 17 ------- 6 ---------- 1 ----- 1,892
2006 ------ 19,807 ----- 548 ----- 196 ------ 39 ---------- 2 ---- 20,592
2007 ------ 20,900 -- 11,545 --- 1,421 --- 1,313 --------- 35 ---- 35,214
2008 ----------- 0 -- 10,631 -- 11,958 --- 5,213 ------ 1,769 ---- 29,571
2009 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 5 -- 17,426 -------- 616 ---- 18,047
2010 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 --- 6,647 ------ 7,815 ---- 14,462
2011 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------ 2,405 ----- 2,405
Total ----- 42,430 -- 22,869-- 13,597 --- 30,644 ----- 12,643 --- 122,183


Ch & In. -- FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 H1 -- CY Total
2005 --------- 579 ------ 35 ------- 5 ------- 1 ---------- 0 ------- 620
2006 ------ 14,514 ----- 147 ------ 70 ------ 14 ---------- 1 ---- 14,746
2007 ------ 16,326 -- 10,251 --- 1,141 --- 1,203 --------- 48 ---- 28,969
2008 ----------- 0 --- 9,464 -- 12,273 --- 4,368 ------ 1,381 ---- 27,486
2009 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------ 10 -- 17,223 ------ 1,000 ---- 18,233
2010 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 -- 10,173 ----- 13,218 ---- 23,391
2011 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------ 4,297 ----- 4,297
Total ----- 31,419 -- 19,897 -- 13,499 -- 32,982 ----- 19,945 --- 117,742


ROW-M-P --- FY2007 -- FY2008 -- FY2009 -- FY2010 -- FY2011 H1 -- CY Total
2005 ------- 2,318 ----- 186 ------ 21 ------ 12 ---------- 1 ----- 2,538
2006 ------ 24,695 ----- 754 ----- 254 ------ 70 ---------- 4 ---- 25,777
2007 ------ 26,680 -- 14,473 --- 1,661 --- 1,523 --------- 44 ---- 44,381
2008 ----------- 0 -- 13,895 -- 14,059 --- 6,574 ------ 2,442 ---- 36,970
2009 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 8 -- 21,199 -------- 737 ---- 21,944
2010 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 --- 7,877 ------ 9,220 ---- 17,097
2011 ----------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------- 0 ------ 2,811 ----- 2,811
Total ----- 53,693 -- 29,308-- 16,003 --- 37,255 ----- 15,259 --- 151,518

ALL ------- 85,112 -- 49,205 -- 29,502 -- 70,237 ----- 35,204 --- 269,260

Spec,
Nice work, I am assuming FY 2011 H1 --> First half of FY 2011.

Q,
I would recommend posting this right after the predictions on page 1(header) of this thread for quick reference and update when ever new information is released from DOL/USCIS/DOS

[Spectator]

Spec,
Nice work, I am assuming FY 2011 H1 --> First half of FY 2011.
Veni,

Correct.

I'll change it to Q1-Q2, since people probably aren't familiar with that terminology.

I was planning to update the FY2011 approvals in the post as the new data is released.

[admin]

Veni

I create a separate category for all supporting data and calculations in a folder called "FACTS AND DATA". Lets put any useful calculations there.

Thanks!


Spec,
Nice work, I am assuming FY 2011 H1 --> First half of FY 2011.

Q,
I would recommend posting this right after the predictions on page 1(header) of this thread for quick reference and update when ever new information is released from DOL/USCIS/DOS

[veni001]

Veni

I create a separate category for all supporting data and calculations in a folder called "FACTS AND DATA". Lets put any useful calculations there.

Thanks!

Thanks Q,
If you like you may want to throw the following table next to it!


FY2005- EBi485
- Country --- EB1 ----- EB2 ----- EB3 ----EB4 ---EB5 ---- Total
INDIA ----- 6,336 ---16,687 ---23,399 ----733 -----5 --- 47,160
CHINA ----- 6,422 ----9,346 ----4,998 ----118 ----44 ----20,928
MEXICO -----2,932 ------368 ---12,632 ----739 -----5 ----16,676
PHIL. ------- 596 ----- 510 ---11,129 ----484 -----4 ----12,723
ROW -------50,058 ---16,501 ---69,972 --8,026 ---291 ---144,848
Total -----66,344 -- 43,412 --122,130 -10,100 ---349 ---242,335

FY2006-EBi485
- Country --- EB1 ---- EB2 ---- EB3 ---- EB4 ---- EB5 ---- Total
INDIA ----- 3,156 ---3,719 ---3,177 -----610 -------2 ----10,664
CHINA ----- 3,278 ---3,344 ---2,739 ------98 ------63 -----9,522
MEXICO -----1,637 -----293 ---7,735 -----722 -------0 ----10,387
PHIL. --------411 ---- 649 ---4,709 -----467 -------0 -----6,236
ROW -------29,007 --14,420 --44,985 ---7,664 -----437 ----96,513
Total -----37,489 --22,425 --63,345 ---9,561 -----502 ---133,322

FY2007-EBi465
- Country -- EB1 ------ EB2 ----- EB3 -----EB4 ---EB5 ---- Total
INDIA -----2,855 -----6,203 ---17,985 -----357 -----4 ----27,404
CHINA -----2,982 -----6,797 ----3,681 ------45 ----73 ----13,578
MEXICO ----1,109 -------900 ---10,174 -----408 -----0 ----12,183
PHIL. -------271 -----1,608 ----8,710------278 -----0 ----10,589
ROW ------19,590 ----28,892 ---37,115 ---3,706 ---394 ----89,697
Total ----26,807 --- 44,400 ---77,665 ---4,794 ---471 ---154,137

FY2008-EBi485
- Country --- EB1 ---- EB2 ---- EB3 ---- EB4 ---- EB5 ----Total
INDIA ----- 5,326 --14,806 ---3,745 -----461 ------19 ---24,357
CHINA ----- 5,602 ---6,955 ---2,057 ------93 -----360 ---15,067
MEXICO -----1,456 ---1,347 ---5,325 -----680 ------15 ----8,823
PHIL. --------310 ---2,057 ---6,154 -----418 -------4 ----8,943
ROW -------23,890 --44,934 --29,884 ---6,006 ---1,045 --105,759
Total -----36,584---70,499---47,165 ---7,658 ---1,443 --162,949

FY2009-EBi485
- Country --- EB1 ---- EB2 ----- EB3 ---- EB4 ----EB5 --- Total
INDIA ----- 6,672 ---10,124 ---2,306 -----771 -----34 ---19,907
CHINA -----4,999 --- -3,046 ---1,077 ------91 --1,828 ---11,041
MEXICO ----2,010 -------922 ---4,566 -----815 ------5 ----8,318
PHIL. ------ 524 -----1,853 ---5,540 -----467 ------1 ----8,385
ROW ------26,774 ----30,123 --26,309 ---7,855 --1,354 ---92,415
Total ----40,979 --- 46,049---39,798 ---9,999 --3,222 --140,047

FY2010-EBi485
- Country --- EB1 ----- EB2 ---- EB3 ---EB4 ---- EB5 ---Total
INDIA ----- 6,741 ---19,961 ---3,306 ---824 ------62 ---30,624
CHINA ------6,741 ----6,505 ---3,676 ----98 -----772 ---17,792
MEXICO -----1,835 ------817 ---7,740 ---943 ------50 ---11,385
PHIL. ------- 407 ----2,162 ---3,651 ---563 -------3 ----6,786
ROW -------25,302 ---24,427 --24,058 -8,620 -----998 ---83,405
Total -----41,026 ---53,872---42,431 11,048 ---1,885 --150,262

[qesehmk]

Thanks veni. That is 485 data right? I will put it under 485 thread.

Can you summarize and say what this data means please? This way readers don't have to make an effort to understand conclusion.

Spec same with the labor data ... if you would like to summarize your labor data into a conculsion that would be nice.



Thanks Q,
If you like you may want to throw the following table next to it!


FY2005- EBi485
- Country --- EB1 ---- EB2 ---- EB3 ---- EB4 ---- EB5 -- Total
INDIA ----- 6,336 ---16,687 ---23,399 ---733 -----5 --- 47,160
CHINA ----- 6,422 ----9,346 ----4,998 ---118 ----44 ----20,928
MEXICO -----2,932 ------368 ---12,632 ---739 -----5 ----16,676
PHIL. ------- 596 ----- 510 ---11,129 ---484 -----4 ----12,723
ROW -------50,058 ---16,501 ---69,972 -8,026 ---291 ---144,848
Total -----66,344 -- 43,412 --122,130 10,100 ---349 ---242,335

FY2006-EBi485
- Country --- EB1 ---- EB2 ---- EB3 ---- EB4 ---- EB5 ---- Total
INDIA ----- 3,156 ---3,719 ---3,177 -----610 -------2 ----10,664
CHINA ----- 3,278 ---3,344 ---2,739 ------98 ------63 -----9,522
MEXICO -----1,637 -----293 ---7,735 -----722 -------0 ----10,387
PHIL. --------411 ---- 649 ---4,709 -----467 -------0 -----6,236
ROW -------29,007 --14,420 --44,985 ---7,664 -----437 ----96,513
Total -----37,489 --22,425 --63,345 ---9,561 -----502 ---133,322

FY2007-EBi465
- Country -- EB1 -- EB2 -- EB3 -- EB4 -- EB5 -- Total
INDIA ----- 2,855 ---6,203 ---17,985 ---357 ---4 ---27,404
CHINA --- 2,982 ---6,797 ---3,681 ---45 ---73 ---13,578
MEXICO ----1,109 -------900 ---10,174 ---408 ---0 ---12,183
PHIL. -------271 -----1,608 ---8,710 ------278 -----0 ----10,589
ROW ------19,590 ----28,892 ---37,115 ---3,706 ---394 ----89,697
Total ----26,807 --- 44,400 ---77,665 ---4,794 ---471 ---154,137

FY2008-EBi485
- Country --- EB1 ---- EB2 ---- EB3 ---- EB4 ---- EB5 ---- Total
INDIA ----- 5,326 --14,806 ---3,745 -----461 ------19 ---24,357
CHINA ----- 5,602 ---6,955 ---2,057 ------93 -----360 ---15,067
MEXICO -----1,456 ---1,347 ---5,325 -----680 ------15 ----8,823
PHIL. --------310 ---2,057 ---6,154 -----418 -------4 ----8,943
ROW -------23,890 --44,934 --29,884 ---6,006 ---1,045 --105,759
Total -----36,584---70,499---47,165 ---7,658 ---1,443 --162,949

FY2009-EBi485
- Country --- EB1 ---- EB2 ---- EB3 ---- EB4 ---- EB5 --- Total
INDIA ----- 6,672 ---10,124 ---2,306 -----771 -----34 ---19,907
CHINA -----4,999 --- -3,046 ---1,077 ------91 --1,828 ---11,041
MEXICO ----2,010 -------922 ---4,566 -----815 ------5 ----8,318
PHIL. ------ 524 -----1,853 ---5,540 -----467 ------1 ----8,385
ROW ------26,774 ----30,123 --26,309 ---7,855 --1,354 ---92,415
Total ----40,979 --- 46,049---39,798 ---9,999 --3,222 --140,047

FY2010-EBi485
- Country --- EB1 ----- EB2 ---- EB3 ---EB4 ---- EB5 ---Total
INDIA ----- 6,741 ---19,961 ---3,306 ---824 ------62 ---30,624
CHINA ------6,741 ----6,505 ---3,676 ----98 -----772 ---17,792
MEXICO -----1,835 ------817 ---7,740 ---943 ------50 ---11,385
PHIL. ------- 407 ----2,162 ---3,651 ---563 -------3 ----6,786
ROW -------25,302 ---24,427 --24,058 -8,620 -----998 ---83,405
Total -----41,026 ---53,872---42,431 11,048 ---1,885 --150,262

[Gclongwait]

I just had a question regarding porting. I see the gurus keep assuming that porting will increase every year. Is there any reason to believe that porting in 2011 will be any more than 2010 or 2009 for that matter?

It has been quite clear for atleast 4 years now that EB2 is a tortoise and EB3 is a snail so I would think snail --> tortoise should be nearly the same for atleast the last 2-3 years.

[veni001]

Thanks veni. That is 485 data right? I will put it under 485 thread.

Can you summarize and say what this data means please? This way readers don't have to make an effort to understand conclusion.

Spec same with the labor data ... if you would like to summarize your labor data into a conculsion that would be nice.

Q,
Yes, It is the EB-i485 approval data published by DOS by country for FY2005 - FY2010.

[Spectator]

Thanks veni. That is 485 data right? I will put it under 485 thread.

Can you summarize and say what this data means please? This way readers don't have to make an effort to understand conclusion.

Spec same with the labor data ... if you would like to summarize your labor data into a conculsion that would be nice.

Q, I am not entirely sure what you want.

I have edited my post and put an explanation at the bottom.

Hope that serves your purpose. Let me know if it doesn't and exactly what you are looking for.

[qesehmk]

Spec

Thanks. I utilized your latest update and pulled the explanation at top. Check in the sub-forum "FACTS and DATA".

I think having FACTS and DATA separately accessible will keep it clean for people who are looking specifically for them.


Q, I am not entirely sure what you want.

I have edited my post and put an explanation at the bottom.

Hope that serves your purpose. Let me know if it doesn't and exactly what you are looking for.

[vishnu]

The main reason USCIS is not wasting visas anymore (at least we believe they will not) is the fact they have pending inventory which they have pre-adjudicated. Once the current inventory as per demand data gets over (unclear when but the optimist in me stays by September of this year), wouldn't they want to move dates beyond just a month or so. They may not make it current, but I would think Dos would move dates at least 3-6 months to ensure that USCIS have enough inventory to work on to avoid wasting visa numbers. Thoughts gurus?

[Spectator]

The main reason USCIS is not wasting visas anymore (at least we believe they will not) is the fact they have pending inventory which they have pre-adjudicated. Once the current inventory as per demand data gets over (unclear when but the optimist in me stays by September of this year), wouldn't they want to move dates beyond just a month or so. They may not make it current, but I would think Dos would move dates at least 3-6 months to ensure that USCIS have enough inventory to work on to avoid wasting visa numbers. Thoughts gurus?

vishnu,

Yes, that is what DOS would do in my personal opinion, although I don't know how far ahead the dates would move.

However, I think you are being super optimistic in thinking the backlog will be cleared this year, particularly in light of the number of people who still have to file with PDs of Jan-Jul 2007.

If the backlog is not cleared this year, DOS will have the potential luxury of moving the dates very slowly at the start of FY2012, since the 7% (2,803) and no more than 27% in each of the first 3 quarters rules will be in effect at the beginning of the year.

Then sometime in the period May-Jul 2012 DOS can think about moving the dates forward in a controlled manner. The timing and amount of movement might depend on how long DOS believes it will take for new applications to turn into demand for visas.

Although the visibility of future cases from USCIS may be lacking hard numbers from USCIS themselves, DOS are not stupid. They know the breakdown of their own cases at NVC and can probably fairly accurately extrapolate those numbers to arrive at likely USCIS numbers. They can also do the same calculations on likely numbers of future I-485 numbers that have been presented in earlier discussions here.

If they get it wrong, DOS have the option of moving EB3-ROW forward in the last month to consume any spare visas using pre-adjudicated cases. I think this would be a last resort, due to the protests it would cause - but it is an option.

My thoughts anyway.

[qesehmk]

Spec ... I agree that backlog may not get cleared this year.

However as per the DOS having luxury.... I am not so sure. Next year they will again have 20-30K SOFAD. If they wait until May-Jun 2012 to move dates ...they simply won't be able to utilize SOFAD. So teh dates will move ahead at least 9 months prior to SOFAD IF USCIS WERE TO FULLY UTILIZE VISAS WITHIN EB2 CATEEGORY.



I think you are being super optimistic in thinking the backlog will be cleared this year.

If the backlog is not cleared this year, DOS will have the potential luxury of moving the dates very slowly at the start of FY2012, since the 7% (2,803) and no more than 27% in each of the first 3 quarters rules will be in effect at the beginning of the year.

Then sometime in the period May-Jul 2012 DOS can think about moving the dates forward in a controlled manner.

[anuran]

Next year they will again have 20-30K SOFAD. If they wait until May-Jun 2012 to move dates ...they simply won't be able to utilize SOFAD.

But when do they get an exact idea of how much SOFAD there will be? They cannot move cutoff dates based on an arbitrary prediction of SOFAD. Or do they get an exact estimate at the end of the first quarter?

[qesehmk]

That is one of the reason why massive forward movement followed by retrogression is a good idea from USCIS DOS perspective.

It allows them to take in a bunch of applications and then chew over them at their own speed and still not waste visas in case there is significant SOFAD.

To answer your question .... they have a gut feel even at the beginning of the year simply based on the PERM and 140 pipeline. As year progresses .. by end of Q2 they have pretty darn good idea how the year is going to end. However that would be too late and so the movement needs to happen much earlier.



But when do they get an exact idea of how much SOFAD there will be? They cannot move cutoff dates based on an arbitrary prediction of SOFAD. Or do they get an exact estimate at the end of the first quarter?

[Spectator]

Spec ... I agree that backlog may not get cleared this year.

However as per the DOS having luxury.... I am not so sure. Next year they will again have 20-30K SOFAD. If they wait until May-Jun 2012 to move dates ...they simply won't be able to utilize SOFAD. So teh dates will move ahead at least 9 months prior to SOFAD IF USCIS WERE TO FULLY UTILIZE VISAS WITHIN EB2 CATEEGORY.
I agree with anuran.

DOS are constrained by law as to what they can do. Until April, only 54% of visas can be issued and DOS can only move the Cut Off Dates consistent with visas being available. April introduces another potential 27%. That seems the absolute earliest any movement could be made.

Underutilization in other Categories/Countries gives some wiggle room, whilst still staying within the quarterly limits.

However, I think DOS need until at least April (when the May VB Cut Off Dates are set) to judge the trends for all Categories for the year.

That gives 5 full months to adjudicate new applications and is 3 months ahead of Spillover being released. USCIS have to "step up to the plate" and ensure that happens. As I said previously, DOS have a fallback to not waste visas, if USCIS are unable to do so.

It would be a greater "crime" within DOS to advance EB2 IC too far and for other non-limited Countries to be deprived of visas. The conservative nature of DOS suggests they won't let that happen.

At the end of the day, none of us knows what is going to happen. It does make for an interesting discussion though and you may well be correct. :)

[qesehmk]

That's fine ... lets agree to disagree. Good that there is not a groupthink here.

I particularly would disagree about

Quote
It would be a greater "crime" within DOS to advance EB2 IC too far and for other non-limited Countries to be deprived of visas.
Unquote

The 7% limit coupled with FA FD related rules strictly in order of PD would ensure that other non-limited countries are not deprived of visas.

I agree with anuran.

DOS are constrained by law as to what they can do. Until April, only 54% of visas can be issued and DOS can only move the Cut Off Dates consistent with visas being available. April introduces another potential 27%. That seems the absolute earliest any movement could be made.

Underutilization in other Categories/Countries gives some wiggle room, whilst still staying within the quarterly limits.

However, I think DOS need until at least April (when the May VB Cut Off Dates are set) to judge the trends for all Categories for the year.

That gives 5 full months to adjudicate new applications and is 3 months ahead of Spillover being released. USCIS have to "step up to the plate" and ensure that happens. As I said previously, DOS have a fallback to not waste visas, if USCIS are unable to do so.

It would be a greater "crime" within DOS to advance EB2 IC too far and for other non-limited Countries to be deprived of visas. The conservative nature of DOS suggests they won't let that happen.

At the end of the day, none of us knows what is going to happen. It does make for an interesting discussion though and you may well be correct. :)

[bieber]

If they don't accept the new I485s beforehand, they will be in a situation where the only choice would be to make the dates current (not some random date). Unless monthly spillover rules are kept in place there is no way USCIS can set a date other than current to know the demand.

it's the time DOS/CIS needs to introduce another date system to accept new 485s ahead (may be an year in advance to cutoff) and move the cutoff dates as per spill over availablity

Spec, just by moving dates aggressively for EB2IC to build the inventory, there would be no harm for non IC countries. you are correct if they issue visas to retrogressed countries by keeping non IC people in line

[bieber]

I'm waiting for filing I485 so I would agree my perspective is biased but I don't think I'm posting with irrational reasoning

[Spectator]

That's fine ... lets agree to disagree. Good that there is not a groupthink here.

I particularly would disagree about

Quote
It would be a greater "crime" within DOS to advance EB2 IC too far and for other non-limited Countries to be deprived of visas.
Unquote

The 7% limit coupled with FA FD related rules strictly in order of PD would ensure that other non-limited countries are not deprived of visas.
I think you slightly misunderstood my post, but let's leave it there.

It is a very contentious issue and we can only speculate how it is going to be handled.

I think we can probably agree that any aggressive forward movement would almost certainly be followed by substantial retrogression (outside of spillover season).

[veni001]

If they don't accept the new I485s beforehand, they will be in a situation where the only choice would be to make the dates current (not some random date). Unless monthly spillover rules are kept in place there is no way USCIS can set a date other than current to know the demand.

it's the time DOS/CIS needs to introduce another date system to accept new 485s ahead (may be an year in advance to cutoff) and move the cutoff dates as per spill over availablity

Spec, just by moving dates aggressively for EB2IC to build the inventory, there would be no harm for non IC countries. you are correct if they issue visas to retrogressed countries by keeping non IC people in line

bieber,
I agree to some extent, But only after EB2I&C PD is moved to July 2007, until then they have enough cases to work with! And also they will be getting new demand(PWMB and porting, almost ~25k) as EB2I&C PD progressing towards 01AUG2007.

If and when DOS makes EB2 PD current(assume July 2012/2013) they will get enough case to work with for another 6 years from that time! ( assuming SOFAD will continue at equal or greater than 2010/11 rate during that 6 years)

[anuran]

it's the time DOS/CIS needs to introduce another date system to accept new 485s ahead (may be an year in advance to cutoff) and move the cutoff dates as per spill over availablity

Since we are not sure about the system, they are already adopting, we cannot suggest that they adopt an alternate system. One thing I see missing is transparency. CIS is not telling us why they moved the date by 2 months in the May bulletin. Just throwing the demand numbers that was used to determine the cutoff dates provides us with no no clues as to why they moved, say 2 months in May bulletin.

[qesehmk]

I think we can probably agree that any aggressive forward movement would almost certainly be followed by substantial retrogression (outside of spillover season).
Yes. I agree on this one.


If they don't accept the new I485s beforehand, they will be in a situation where the only choice would be to make the dates current (not some random date).

Bieber you make a good point here. Agree.
I think that's how the dynamics will work. I do not know about the timing. But in terms of movement .. thats the dynamic.

[anuran]

it's the time DOS/CIS needs to introduce another date system to accept new 485s ahead (may be an year in advance to cutoff) and move the cutoff dates as per spill over availablity

Other than transparency, they can do something else. Exact spillover numbers are known only at the end of the FY. But at the end the FY they have no processing power to utilize off those numbers which may be ~20k or so. Hence they have to do start using partial estimated spillover numbers way before the end of the FY. They have to do that to avoid wasting that 20k. Instead what they can actually do is, FY10 spillover could be carried over to FY11. That way they can utilize the cap for 2011 and the spill from 2010 at the same time and also provide us with better estimates. But I do not drive the policies and procedures at CIS. :)

[bieber]

veni

i agree with you, not sure how you wanted to connect the blue sentences. I don't see a reason why they would want to choose from jan1st 2008 (end of calendar), oct 1st 2008 (end of fiscal), oct 1st 2009 (known information is 2008/2009 demand is low) other than making current.

I know they can be as unpredicted as possible but here we are just trying to understand their logic/motive behind this.

[kd2008]

If you look at family-based categories, DOS/USCIS were faulted by Ombudsman for not moving dates aggressively and wasting visa numbers - which then spilled over to employment based categories.

So in the last year DOS aggressively moved the dates only to substantially retrogress them later . Esp. F2A - Its Dec 2010 visa bulletin cut off date was Aug. 2010. In May 2011 visa bulletin that date has retrogressed to 08 June 2007.

Something similar to will happen for EB2 retrogressed nations. I think DOS will try to move dates to the point that will give them approx. 30K cases (based on last few years consumption) or so and then retrogress and try to consume them in the following year.

Rest assured, the date movement will be volatile with people getting pissed off that someone else got GC in spite of later PD etc.

[veni001]

veni

i agree with you, not sure how you wanted to connect the blue sentences. I don't see a reason why they would want to choose from jan1st 2008 (end of calendar), oct 1st 2008 (end of fiscal), oct 1st 2009 (known information is 2008/2009 demand is low) other than making current.

I know they can be as unpredicted as possible but here we are just trying to understand their logic/motive behind this.

biber,
I was pointing those two because those statements contradict each other.
I think we need to closely watch what they are doing with FB movement lately.

[veni001]

If you look at family-based categories, DOS/USCIS were faulted by Ombudsman for not moving dates aggressively and wasting visa numbers - which then spilled over to employment based categories.

So in the last year DOS aggressively moved the dates only to substantially retrogress them later . Esp. F2A - Its Dec 2010 visa bulletin cut off date was Aug. 2010. In May 2011 visa bulletin that date has retrogressed to 08 June 2007.

Something similar to will happen for EB2 retrogressed nations. I think DOS will try to move dates to the point that will give them approx. 30K cases (based on last few years consumption) or so and then retrogress and try to consume them in the following year.

Rest assured, the date movement will be volatile with people getting pissed off that someone else got GC in spite of later PD etc.

kd2008,
This is a very good observation, FB is almost always retrogressed and see what they did last year, they did not make it current to see what is out there.
Since USCIS know EB2I&C demand very well now( at least they can look at their i140 receipts/approval data)they can/may implement the same here!

[Spectator]

Some great reponses guys.

I probably presented the most conservative option in the hope that we would have a good discussion.;) However, it is not an impossible scenario, although maybe unlikely.

I do agree that DOS would probably like to have some known demand pending - the question is how much.

As has been pointed out, DOS did not make various FB Categories Current to stimulate demand. There are also some obvious differences regarding AOS vs CP between FB and EB. CP cases have a substantial dropout rate, particularly in FB where the wait time is so long.

In fact, DOS moved the FB dates forward over a period of 8 months and there were only really 3 months where the movement was substantial.

Possibly one lesson for DOS, was that it takes time for the demand to surface. In reality, they probably moved the dates too far and then had to retrogress dramatically. For FB, there was nowhere else for the visas to go if there was not enough demand generated.

The current EB2 backlog for IC is in the region of 33k.

In eventually moving the Cut Off Dates to July 2007, another 7k demand will be generated by PWMB.

Moving the Cut Off Date to December 2007 will generate another additional 15k demand.

So from today, the EB2 IC demand would be 33 + 7 + 15 = 55k plus porting numbers to December 2007.

After porting, this year will likely consume something like 29-34k of that 55k.

Even at the lower end, 21k + porting numbers is a fairly healthy buffer for DOS.

Therefore, I don't see the dates moving much beyond December 2007, even if DOS want to be quite aggressive.

As Q pointed out, Cut Off Date movement does take time to translate to visa demand, so possibly the movement would have to be relatively early, but I don't believe it will be in this fiscal year.

Feel free to rip it apart.

[veni001]

Some great reponses guys.

I probably presented the most conservative option in the hope that we would have a good discussion.;) However, it is not an impossible scenario, although maybe unlikely.

I do agree that DOS would probably like to have some known demand pending - the question is how much.

As has been pointed out, DOS did not make various FB Categories Current to stimulate demand. There are also some obvious differences regarding AOS vs CP between FB and EB. CP cases have a substantial dropout rate, particularly in FB where the wait time is so long.

In fact, DOS moved the FB dates forward over a period of 8 months and there were only really 3 months where the movement was substantial.

Possibly one lesson for DOS, was that it takes time for the demand to surface. In reality, they probably moved the dates too far and then had to retrogress dramatically. For FB, there was nowhere else for the visas to go if there was not enough demand generated.

The current EB2 backlog for IC is in the region of 33k.

In eventually moving the Cut Off Dates to July 2007, another 7k demand will be generated by PWMB.

Moving the Cut Off Date to December 2007 will generate another additional 15k demand.

So from today, the EB2 IC demand would be 33 + 7 + 15 = 55k plus porting numbers to December 2007.

After porting, this year will likely consume something like 29-34k of that 55k.

Even at the lower end, 21k + porting numbers is a fairly healthy buffer for DOS.

Therefore, I don't see the dates moving much beyond December 2007, even if DOS want to be quite aggressive.

As Q pointed out, Cut Off Date movement does take time to translate to visa demand, so possibly the movement would have to be relatively early, but I don't believe it will be in this fiscal year.

Feel free to rip it apart.

Nothing to rip apart :) , just to add, since FB2AI&C advanced 13 months from May 2010 to June 2010, if they use the same method (or madness) we should see that aggression for EB in June 2011!

[bieber]

biber,
I was pointing those two because those statements contradict each other.
I think we need to closely watch what they are doing with FB movement lately.

Veni, actually what I mentioned in that post are 2 different scenarios, they cannot set random date on the cutoff dates (I know they can do anything but that's just my point of view) but if they initiate another date system parallelly to accept new I485s and they can set that at random date to build the inventory and move the cutoff dates in orderly fashion

[Spectator]

Veni, actually what I mentioned in that post are 2 different scenarios, they cannot set random date on the cutoff dates (I know they can do anything but that's just my point of view) but if they initiate another date system parallelly to accept new I485s and they can set that at random date to build the inventory and move the cutoff dates in orderly fashion

bieber,

I think that would be a good solution, but I'm not sure that it wouldn't need legislation to implement.

There was previously talk of a pre-registration system for I-485. The 2 track approach could have been a natural evolution of that proposal.

As proposed, it might not have necessarily led to the ability to submit I-485, but it would have given DOS very good visibility of I-485s to be submitted for a particular PD.

That would have allowed DOS to move the dates ahead in a timely manner, without having to guess the future demand.

[bieber]

Spec

I remember that legislation, there used to be some updates on oh law firm website and the proposed start date on the bill used to get updated every 6 months.

if they actually expect pre-registration and then move the dates accordingly based on that informaion there will be no use with EAD/AP which is kind of weird, so if we assume they issue EAD with pre-reg, also there is no point in setting a date for that pre-reg process so essentially everyone who have approved 140 can register, but if everyone is getting EADs (which is almost like GC) with a approved 140, practially it wouldn't matter when one gets the actual greencard. is there something wrong with that, no but it will be too good to be true to belive

[qesehmk]

I think USCIS should remove the condition of dates being current on I485. The condition of dates being current before filing 485 is quite cruel - especially for EB3IC ..... those guys ... they are never going to have their date current in foreseeable future if their date is anytime past 2006. So they can't change employers and have no option other than porting.

p.s. - The reason that condition doesn't make sense is because technically the person (and his sponsor) has completed all the requirements for greencard. And the person is only waiting for adjustment of status or CP. So why put the person's GC in jeopardy should he lose job? By having that condition on 485 filing, the USCIS is jeopardizing the applicants GC.

I sincerely think that EB3IC guys should explore making such a case to USCIS first and possibly to courts if USCIS doesn't act favorably.


Veni, actually what I mentioned in that post are 2 different scenarios, they cannot set random date on the cutoff dates (I know they can do anything but that's just my point of view) but if they initiate another date system parallelly to accept new I485s and they can set that at random date to build the inventory and move the cutoff dates in orderly fashion

[kd2008]

I think USCIS should remove the condition of dates being current on I485. The condition of dates being current before filing 485 is quite cruel - especially for EB3IC ..... those guys ... they are never going to have their date current in foreseeable future if their date is anytime past 2006. So they can't change employers and have no option other than porting.

p.s. - The reason that condition doesn't make sense is because technically the person (and his sponsor) has completed all the requirements for greencard. And the person is only waiting for adjustment of status or CP. So why put the person's GC in jeopardy should he lose job? By having that condition on 485 filing, the USCIS is jeopardizing the applicants GC.

I sincerely think that EB3IC guys should explore making such a case to USCIS first and possibly to courts if USCIS doesn't act favorably.

It was proposed via regulatory action in Fall 2009. See http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=200910&RIN=1615-AB82

Since then, it has been removed from the agenda. I think, it did not pass the legal muster and hence was subsequently abandoned.

[qesehmk]

Thanks KD. Very good info indeed. What do you mean "did not pass legal muster".

Do you think people have a chance if they go to court?


It was proposed via regulatory action in Fall 2009. See http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=200910&RIN=1615-AB82

Since then, it has been removed from the agenda. I think, it did not pass the legal muster and hence was subsequently abandoned.

[kd2008]

Q, laws are written pretty broadly - these many visa, these many categories, here are the rules etc. Some govt. agency then interprets them and sets down procedures. The link I posted refers to the Office of Policy and Strategy of the USCIS. This is the body that will see if certain interpretation will be challenged in court, will it stand in court etc. They dropped it - meaning it is their belief that adopting that agenda item will be stretching the written law too far, will probably be challenged in court etc. It is what happens with many govt agencies. They don't want to be seen as being too creative in implementing the law. Moreover, the next elected administration can undo the change. Hence Congressional action is preferred even tough it is very difficult to achieve.

[ravisekhar]

the link below gives how many times it was postponed
http://www.reginfo.gov/public/servlet/ForwardServlet?SearchTarget=Agenda&textfield=1615-AB82

the last time they did in Fall 2010 and status shows Withdrawn. It doesnt have a reason why it is withdrawn. the below link is the final time it was proposed and withdrawn

http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201010&RIN=1615-AB82

[Spectator]

Spec

I remember that legislation, there used to be some updates on oh law firm website and the proposed start date on the bill used to get updated every 6 months.

if they actually expect pre-registration and then move the dates accordingly based on that informaion there will be no use with EAD/AP which is kind of weird, so if we assume they issue EAD with pre-reg, also there is no point in setting a date for that pre-reg process so essentially everyone who have approved 140 can register, but if everyone is getting EADs (which is almost like GC) with a approved 140, practially it wouldn't matter when one gets the actual greencard. is there something wrong with that, no but it will be too good to be true to belive

bieber,

Good points.

As I read the pre-registration proposal, it didn't allow the I-485 to be submitted. Since both EAD and AP are a direct benefit of a pending I-485, it would not have allowed filing for EAD either.

Something really does need to be done, but I admit I don't have an answer.

One problem with freely allowing EAD and AP with an approved I-140 is that it wouldn't be consistent, or fair to CP applicants.

Those already in the USA and choosing AOS would be able to work with complete freedom and portability. At the same time, those who chose Consular Processing would not.

Eventually, no one would choose CP and since the EAD/AP combination is almost as good as a GC, the wait would not be a disincentive to anyone; it would be de facto unlimited immigration.

Thus, I could see huge numbers of extra I-140 applications/approvals, ever growing backlogs and even greater retrogression.

On the other hand, it would allow people in areas with critical skill shortages, such as nursing to actually fill them immediately, rather than waiting for years for the PD to become Current.

Even seemingly simple and fair solutions aren't always quite as simple or fair as they first appear.

I also don't particularly like the proposal because it is merely a band-aid on a broken system

It requires more than an administrative fix, because the law dictates the use of the dates in the VB.

It seems to me that the effort required would be better spent in bringing about visa recapture to balance the harm done by the increased H1B levels of previous years.

If dependants were not counted against the allocation, the real level of visas would increase to 300k. That level would be sufficient, even within the present system.

As I said, I don't know the solution, other than increasing the overall number of visas available to the primary applicant.

If the supply can't be increased, unpleasant as the thought is, the demand is going to have to be controlled.

One way or another the imbalance between the two cannot continue. It is not fair to everybody concerned.

[qesehmk]

KD

Thanks. I agree that law is one thing but interpretation is another. People and agencies will always find ways to go around the rules when they cant outright break them!

The rule you mentioned did some harm by proposing that concurrent filing be disallowed altogether. And it showed half promise since it talks about filing a registration packet rather than the entire 485. In order for people to get AC21 485 needs to be pending 6 months and 140 approved. So the rule change it seems would have streamlined USCIS workload without benefitting teh applicants.

I do think that if people make a case and go to court this should be relatively straightforward case. Individual has satisfied all requirements so .. delays in filing 485 shouldn/t jeopardize their otherwise complete application.


Q, laws are written pretty broadly - these many visa, these many categories, here are the rules etc. Some govt. agency then interprets them and sets down procedures. The link I posted refers to the Office of Policy and Strategy of the USCIS. This is the body that will see if certain interpretation will be challenged in court, will it stand in court etc. They dropped it - meaning it is their belief that adopting that agenda item will be stretching the written law too far, will probably be challenged in court etc. It is what happens with many govt agencies. They don't want to be seen as being too creative in implementing the law. Moreover, the next elected administration can undo the change. Hence Congressional action is preferred even tough it is very difficult to achieve.

[bieber]

Spec

good post, nothing to disagree. I think the brain-drain concept is now hitting the political circles, and I already directly heard from some elite group of people (on TV) that govt should use skilled immigration backlog to boost the housing market, these kind of things if happen they only happen in US. Economy being the biggest concern, If proper push comes, president will not hesistate to implement this to avoid outflow of talent and fix the economy atleast temporarily.

[Spectator]

Spec

good post, nothing to disagree. I think the brain-drain concept is now hitting the political circles, and I already directly heard from some elite group of people (on TV) that govt should use skilled immigration backlog to boost the housing market, these kind of things if happen they only happen in US. Economy being the biggest concern, If proper push comes, president will not hesistate to implement this to avoid outflow of talent and fix the economy atleast temporarily.

bieber,

Phew!

I was concerned it might be too controversial a post and I know I don't always get the balance right. :(

Thanks for reading it with the intent I meant, which was to highlight an alternative viewpoint; not necessarily my own.

Sometimes we so get wrapped up in our own problems so much that there is a danger we become too blinkered and can't see anybody else's POV. ;)

I was reading the article about how many Citizens and GC holders return home. That is going to become a concern for the US - it should be already. It's another little piece that may jog the powers that be to pay some attention to the plight of the EB people.

[anuran]

I was reading the article about how many Citizens and GC holders return home. That is going to become a concern for the US - it should be already. It's another little piece that may jog the powers that be to pay some attention to the plight of the EB people.

That is an interesting article. >50% 'show intent to deny' US of a batch of highly skilled workers and future entrepreneurs. US now after showing meek concerns for the grad students leaving US after their education, has to be now more concerned about a large number of workers leaving with skills and money. They may even start a competing overseas company. Boy does US badly need an immigration reform before people start abandoning I-485s.

[kd2008]

As far as the prediction game goes I only wish that DOS would clarify one thing: how do they intend to move dates past July 2007 and USCIS would provide monthly categorywise break down of I140 applications received and approved. That's it and we would be set. Our predictions would be spot on.

[Spectator]

As far as the prediction game goes I only wish that DOS would clarify one thing: how do they intend to move dates past July 2007 and USCIS would provide monthly categorywise break down of I140 applications received and approved. That's it and we would be set. Our predictions would be spot on.
kd,

How I wish as well!!

I would add DOS releasing actual numbers of visas allocated and used category-wise on a quarterly basis. I don't want to be too greedy!

[gcseeker]

Bieber

That talk has been around since the crash of 2008 . One of the Florida senators ( Florida was hit hard by the real estate bubble crash ) was attempting to table a similar bill with the idea of granting more GC's with the hope all those people will buy those houses. I have often heard Senators and other CEO's talk very encouragingly on TV ...but often nothing will get done. H1B's and GC's have been used as the smoke screen for political ends for a very long time. The anti immigration lobby is very powerful on Capitol hill and they know the general populace is very frustated with the lawmakers and company heads. There are two rates of unemployment right now , tech is enjoying a 4% rate while manufacturing and the lower skill jobs have an almost 20% unemployment rate ( U6 not U3) . There is immense anger among the people which has led to the birth of the Tea party and other movements. The CEO's will continue to outsource jobs and they need an powerful smoke screen to be used as an bread crumb for the masses. Also nothing will get done in Washington without employing Lobbyists.

This is the reason the Immigration voice thingy failed to make an impact.Nothing is going to happen just writing to the senators.It is true USA is at a turning point and they are losing a lot of talent right now....if they want to maintain that research edge they should be seriously looking at Immigration reform especially for India and China.

:) But will they do it ...will be totally different story. In fact the proof of the pudding lies with the behaviour of many of the Top CEO's ...often the heads of INTEL,MICROSOFT come together to pass many powerful statements on TV asking congress to grant more H1B's and GC's since they claim they employ a lot of them and they cannot find enough of them. With the money power these companies have they should have been able to buy this legislation. ( Eg: From Monday onwards AT&T and Comcast will be placing slabs on Broadband usage and anyone going above their limit will be charged 15 bucks ....monthly limits top off at 150 GB) So why have these powerful CEO's not managed to get this legislation passed . :) They do not want it to be passed.....it gives them H1 B workers who will do anything to please their masters and also gives them a smoke screen since they will not stop cutting jobs here.


I have been hearing about Bills granting automatic GC's to US educated Master students since 2002....It is 2011 right now and not one of them got passed.

Also 2012 is an election year and nothing major ever gets taken up by congress before an election year untill and unless it is going to give them votes.Also USCIS has to answer to its political masters for the sake of proper funding and will not anger them by any aggressive movement.

I beleive they will move the dates by a few months and will hold back for an aggressive push in 2012 and then retrogress them right back.

Sorry for the pessimism but could not help typing this out.




Spec

good post, nothing to disagree. I think the brain-drain concept is now hitting the political circles, and I already directly heard from some elite group of people (on TV) that govt should use skilled immigration backlog to boost the housing market, these kind of things if happen they only happen in US. Economy being the biggest concern, If proper push comes, president will not hesistate to implement this to avoid outflow of talent and fix the economy atleast temporarily.

[soggadu]

gurus,

can i be on H1b and skip pay roll run say in July 2011 and Nov 2011 for taking vacation or anything like that? Please let me know...

[pch053]

I think a bill is placed on the senate for granting green card to individuals with a MS or Phd degree from US schools almost every year. Last time, it was 2009 when the senator from Arizona (I am forgetting his name) proposed this bill. This even was published in India newspapers like TimesOfIndia! At that time, I was looking at the past instance/s of this or similar bill (as I was somewhat hopeful that the bill might pass) and saw that similar bill/s had appeared multiple times but they never went beyond a certain point when the Senators will vote and decide the fate of the bill. So, I agree with 'gcseeker' that I don't see this kind of a bill getting through in the Senate in the next 5 years.

I also found the other point in relation to CEOs of big organizations, quite interesting (and I have myself thought on similar lines). The CEOs of tech companies always point out the shortage of skilled labor but I never see them really pushing for any change in immigration. Not fully sure of the reason though!

[qesehmk]

GCseeker I think your thinking is realistic. Immigration is a super hot topic because the unemployment is so high. The ONLY people who care about immigration are the super rich. Even C level management is reasonably anti-globalization.

So while baby boomers are retiring and there will be a shortage of workers ... the US will quite likely become more anti-immigrant.

One thing for sure ... the opportunities back home are quite enticing. Those nearing their mid-life crisis will be torn because they see their peers becoming executives in Indian companies while this H1B coolie in pursuit of GC stayed project leader or something similar. Those who are relatively young have that window of opportunity IF THEY CHOOSE to embrace it. They can go back and make it big. However its a personal choice. And we should not preach one way or other.



Bieber

That talk has been around since the crash of 2008 . One of the Florida senators ( Florida was hit hard by the real estate bubble crash ) was attempting to table a similar bill with the idea of granting more GC's with the hope all those people will buy those houses. I have often heard Senators and other CEO's talk very encouragingly on TV ...but often nothing will get done. H1B's and GC's have been used as the smoke screen for political ends for a very long time. The anti immigration lobby is very powerful on Capitol hill and they know the general populace is very frustated with the lawmakers and company heads. There are two rates of unemployment right now , tech is enjoying a 4% rate while manufacturing and the lower skill jobs have an almost 20% unemployment rate ( U6 not U3) . There is immense anger among the people which has led to the birth of the Tea party and other movements. The CEO's will continue to outsource jobs and they need an powerful smoke screen to be used as an bread crumb for the masses. Also nothing will get done in Washington without employing Lobbyists.

This is the reason the Immigration voice thingy failed to make an impact.Nothing is going to happen just writing to the senators.It is true USA is at a turning point and they are losing a lot of talent right now....if they want to maintain that research edge they should be seriously looking at Immigration reform especially for India and China.

:) But will they do it ...will be totally different story. In fact the proof of the pudding lies with the behaviour of many of the Top CEO's ...often the heads of INTEL,MICROSOFT come together to pass many powerful statements on TV asking congress to grant more H1B's and GC's since they claim they employ a lot of them and they cannot find enough of them. With the money power these companies have they should have been able to buy this legislation. ( Eg: From Monday onwards AT&T and Comcast will be placing slabs on Broadband usage and anyone going above their limit will be charged 15 bucks ....monthly limits top off at 150 GB) So why have these powerful CEO's not managed to get this legislation passed . :) They do not want it to be passed.....it gives them H1 Bee slave workers who will do anything to please their masters and also gives them a smoke screen since they will not stop cutting jobs here.


I have been hearing about Bills granting automatic GC's to US educated Master students since 2002....It is 2011 right now and not one of them got passed.

Also 2012 is an election year and nothing major ever gets taken up by congress before an election year untill and unless it is going to give them votes.Also USCIS has to answer to its political masters for the sake of proper funding and will not anger them by any aggressive movement.

I beleive they will move the dates by a few months and will hold back for an aggressive push in 2012 and then retrogress them right back.

Sorry for the pessimism but could not help typing this out.

[MorningSun]

Hi guys, does anyone want to make an argument that some of the policies are unconstitutional.

By the way, I vehemently disagree with the immigration status slurs.

[veni001]

Hi guys, does anyone want to make an argument that some of the policies are unconstitutional.

By the way, I vehemently disagree with the immigration status slurs.

I second this.
It is what it is, let's get back to stats/number crunching/prediction game.

[veni001]

So far 31 EB2I approvals posted for the month of May 2011 on trackitt!( 29 of them are May/June 2006 and 2 of them porting).

[gcseeker]

MorningSun

The discussion came about not to state the policies are unconstitutional.USA is well within its rights and constitution to frame its immigration policies any way its want.Just the ground situation and impact of those policies on people's lives was being pointed out.

Also I am sorry you missed the intent of the entire point and thought " H1 Bee slave worker " was slur. We work as hard as Bee's without proper recognition is the intent and it is true with so many restrictions like changing of jobs killing the gc petition etc etc.....situation is very similar . Anywaz I do not wish to divert the topic towards discussing political bills and my response was more to share some thoughts since people will get their hopes up to think those bills will get passed.Just wanted to point that out it might not happen anytime soon.

I will anyhow edit my previous post.


Hi guys, does anyone want to make an argument that some of the policies are unconstitutional.

By the way, I vehemently disagree with the immigration status slurs.

[TeddyKoochu]

So far 31 EB2I approvals posted for the month of May 2011 on trackitt!( 29 of them are May/June 2006 and 2 of them porting).

Veni, following is some analysis of EB2-I cases from Trackitt for EB2-I.
Total Number of Cases - 215
Approved - 89, Denied - 2
Approved in May - 38.

So approved previously = 51.
Number of cases available to approve in May = 215 - 51 -2 = 162.

Now 15% do not update the status of their cases after putting them this is based on historical data.
This makes the number of effective cases = 138.

So the approval rate is 38/149 = 27.5%.

Effectively in the first 4 days 27.5% of the cases have been approved.

[Spectator]

I came across this document, covering FY2010, which I thought was interesting and didn't seem to have had much attention, even though it isn't extremely new.

http://www.nafsa.org/uploadedFiles/DOL2010report.pdf

It is the relevant extract from a much larger document.

I have reproduced most of it below, but there is a table as well. The emphasis is mine, hopefully to help people pick out some of the more interesting points.

I hope some people find it interesting.


Analysis and Future Plans

Employment and Training Administration

Statutes, regulations, and administrative requirements establish mandatory timeframes within which OFLC must process certain applications or take given actions. Each foreign labor certification program is administered under a different set of requirements according to its unique role in the labor market.

For the permanent labor certification program, 37 percent of permanent labor certification program applications were resolved within six months of the initial filing date. When compared to FY 2009, processing times improved substantially due, in large part, to the implementation of a management plan that resulted in the reduction of the backlog of pending permanent cases by approximately 50 percent from 66,885 in September 2009 to less than 35,000 cases in October 2010.

As part of its FY 2011 Operating Plan, OFLC will continue backlog reduction activities designed to bring processing times in line with established FY 2011 goal of 81 percent.

A key and long standing challenge within the foreign labor certification programs has been balancing program integrity activities and the impact of those efforts on overall case processing times and the generation of case backlogs. Eligible U.S. employers will continue to have access to foreign workers when qualified domestic workers are not available. However, additional screens and analytical rigor in the foreign labor certification programs helps ensure American jobs are truly open to U.S. workers, that they get those opportunities first as the Congress originally intended, and that job opportunities are made available to foreign workers only when employers can establish need based on a sound labor market test (H-1B excepted).

Increased integrity activities such as conducting audit investigations and supervised recruitments, which began in 2009, increase the average length of time to resolve a permanent application as these are labor-intensive regulatory processes. However, these two integrity measures also generate the highest number of denials and non-certifications, outcomes which enhance program integrity and contribute to jobs being available to U.S. workers.

The results of these integrity activities are now being reported and demonstrate that a little more than one half of the resolved permanent applications during FY 2010 selected for integrity review were found in compliance.

Because the regulations require employers to attest to compliance with program requirements at the time of filing a permanent application, this indicator measures the likelihood that OFLC will certify an employer application following a more thorough investigation of the employer's compliance with program requirements or when U.S. workers may be available for certain requested positions. Greater scrutiny also ensures, as the statute requires, that the hiring of foreign workers occurs subject to all terms and conditions, including wages, which safeguard the employment and economic security of American workers and their families.

Strategic Goal 1

OFLC will apply stricter scrutiny to applications. In the future, OFLC will revise the PERM application form – which expires in June 2011 – to both strengthen its integrity (by clarifying program requirements) and seek more detailed justifications in key parts of the form.

Managers at OFLC headquarters and the national processing center levels will, where feasible, attempt to implement operational strategies to maintain production levels while enhancing audit investigations and other program integrity efforts.

In FY 2011, the Department intends to propose legislation to establish an employer-paid user fee to partially fund the PERM, H-2A and H-2B programs to: make the programs more responsive to labor market demand; ensure financial resources to process applications timely; and recognize the benefit of the certification is to the employer and not the public.

Finally, OFLC will initiate a baseline review of its SOPs to confirm they are still accurate and appropriate for the current business process, and will develop a methodology to randomly select a sample of resolved permanent program applications for quality review. Implementation of this quarterly review process will be labor intensive and will require an adequate base level of funding in FY 2011 to achieve the desired performance outcome.

United States Department of Labor – FY 2010 Annual Performance Report

NAFSA extracts of OFLC content from DOL report dated 2/11/2011, downloaded from http://www.dol.gov/dol/budget/2012/PDF/CBJ-2012-V1-01.pdf

I'll leave people to draw their own conclusions as to what the statements might mean in reality.

[qesehmk]

As per slurs .. I think if you work long enough in H1B ... you will come to realize that it is slavery. Whether you admit it or not is another matter. And while US is the greatest place for proving your potential, unfortunately the immigration system coupled with the anti-immigrant sentiment is holding the immigrants back in particular IC immigrants.

Yes you can suck it up. But my advice was for especially the EB3ICs who if they choose to can and should make a legal case to file 485 without date being current. Its ok to disagree too. Its a mere advice.

[Spectator]

I just want to return to the subject of Trackitt data and extrapolation briefly.

Usually we use it to help predict EB2-ROW progress and this is based on the number of Trackitt approvals this FY compared to those in the previous year (where we know how many they represent in the real world).

Some may recall that I have some concern that the very different number of Trackitt approvals in October 2009 versus October 2010 may skew the figures, since there is a danger that some October approvals may represent cases where the visa allocation has actually been made from the previous FY quota.

Nonetheless, even using the standard analysis, we have seen EB2-ROW (excl M-P) rise from 61% in October to 98% by the end of April.

An analysis on the same basis for EB2-I shows that the % at the end of March, compared to last year is just 68% (it's the same at the end of April by the way).

Given we also know from the VB that EB2-I probably reached the 2,803 limit by the end of March, 68% doesn't seem to fit the known facts.

To be true, last year EB2-I would have consumed 147% of this year's total by the end of March - 4.1k visas. I think it is fair to say that, at that level, some action or comment might have been seen by DOS last year.

In fact, last year the Cut Off Date stalled at 01FEB05 until July, when the Spillover was released.

If the "October effect" is removed or normalized, then EB2-I is a little less than 100% of last year's figure. If true, it would explain why the Cut Off Dates did not advance, since they had reached the annual limit.

Now, if the above analysis is true for EB2-I, it is also true for EB2-ROW (excl. M-P).

The 98% from the standard analysis at the end of April becomes 110-115%. That might be considered to be consistent with the increase in PERM certifications.

I am NOT saying that EB2-ROW will end the year at 110-115% of last years total, only that it may be higher at this point in the year. As USCIS concentrate on EB2-IC approvals, it is quite possible (maybe even probable) that EB2-ROW approvals will slow down, so I don't think all is lost by any means.

I will continue to monitor the figures month by month.

I suspect not everybody will agree with my analysis, but I thought it was interesting enough to share. I may be pushing the boundaries too far.

It is not a viewpoint that I intend to flog to death on the forum. Everybody must decide for themselves whether it has any merit at all.

[qesehmk]

Hey spec ... very well spoken words. I am thinking we should have a trackitt tracker in our FACTS section.

I will do it before sunday. If somebody wants to do it pls go ahead and post it.

Here is what I will do:

EB2 Section
1- Overall EB2 status YTD and Full Year Projected vs Prior Year & % change & Projected contribution change to SOFAD
2 - Same as 1 for EB2 IC
3 - Same as 1 for EB2 ROW MP
4 - Same as 1 for EB1
5 - Same as 1 for EB4/5

I don't think we need EB3 at all given everything is retrogressed.

Let me know if there is anything else we should be adding in there.


I just want to return to the subject of Trackitt data and extrapolation briefly.

Usually we use it to help predict EB2-ROW progress and this is based on the number of Trackitt approvals this FY compared to those in the previous year (where we know how many they represent in the real world).

Some may recall that I have some concern that the very different number of Trackitt approvals in October 2009 versus October 2010 may skew the figures, since there is a danger that some October approvals may represent cases where the visa allocation has actually been made from the previous FY quota.

Nonetheless, even using the standard analysis, we have seen EB2-ROW (excl M-P) rise from 61% in October to 98% by the end of April.

An analysis on the same basis for EB2-I shows that the % at the end of March, compared to last year is just 68% (it's the same at the end of April by the way).

Given we also know from the VB that EB2-I probably reached the 2,803 limit by the end of March, 68% doesn't seem to fit the known facts.

To be true, last year EB2-I would have consumed 147% of this year's total by the end of March - 4.1k visas. I think it is fair to say that, at that level, some action or comment might have been seen by DOS last year.

In fact, last year the Cut Off Date stalled at 01FEB05 until July, when the Spillover was released.

If the "October effect" is removed or normalized, then EB2-I is a little less than 100% of last year's figure. If true, it would explain why the Cut Off Dates did not advance, since they had reached the annual limit.

Now, if the above analysis is true for EB2-I, it is also true for EB2-ROW (excl. M-P).

The 98% from the standard analysis at the end of April becomes 110-115%. That might be considered to be consistent with the increase in PERM certifications.

I am NOT saying that EB2-ROW will end the year at 110-115% of last years total, only that it may be higher at this point in the year. As USCIS concentrate on EB2-IC approvals, it is quite possible (maybe even probable) that EB2-ROW approvals will slow down, so I don't think all is lost by any means.

I will continue to monitor the figures month by month.

I suspect not everybody will agree with my analysis, but I thought it was interesting enough to share. I may be pushing the boundaries too far.

It is not a viewpoint that I intend to flog to death on the forum. Everybody must decide for themselves whether it has any merit at all.

[Spectator]

Q,

Good idea. I would plead with you to split EB2-ROW-M-P into at least EB2-ROW and EB2-MP.

Coverage of EB2-MP is not very good in Trackitt and has very different % to EB2-ROW.

I don't actually even track EB2-MP because of that fact and tend to use historical data for them. They only tend to account for about 3k anyway.

Thanks for considering it. I'll post the figures I have for EB2-I, EB2-ROW (excl MP) and EB2 ALL when the section is added. You can then extract them and delete the post.

Edited to add that I have the EB1 numbers as well, which I am happy to add.

[Spectator]

I don't think we need EB3 at all given everything is retrogressed.

I agree they probably aren't worth publishing.

I was thinking they may have an indirect role to play.

Here's my logic.

Last year, CO was very conservative with EB3, since he appeared to be worried about hidden demand.

Eventually he released quite large number in Q4 and Cut Off Dates advanced. This meant that quite a large proportion of EB3 approvals were made during Spillover season. In fact EB3 approvals in Q4 appear to represent 60% of total EB3 approvals for the year.

Overall approvals at this point in the year (based on Trackitt) are double those of last year.

Hopefully, this should mean that relatively fewer EB3 approvals need to be made in Q4. The VB talks of steady progress.

This and maybe lower EB1 numbers, might mean that the overall workload for USCIS in Q4 (spillover season) is actually no higher than it was last year, despite a lot more spillover numbers.

Within the workload, the % of EB2 approvals will just be much higher.

I thought that was a rather cheery conclusion.

As long as there are sufficient applications to process, we probably shouldn't worry too much about USCIS' ability to do so.

[alex99]

DOL Released Latest PERM DATA (From OCT-2010 to Mar 2011): It says Q2 data but the mdb file actually contains both Q1 and Q2 figures (OCT 2010 to MAR 2011)

http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/quarterlydata.cfm

[alex99]

TOTAL (OCT 2010 to MAR 2011) PERM COUNT (Certified and Certified-Expired) : 35,204

INDIA COUNT : 17,830

CHINA COUNT : 2115

So based on the above, Approximate PERM ROW Count(EB2 + EB3) : 15,000 for Six months (OCT 2010 to MAR 2011)

[qesehmk]

Thanks. So if we assume 60% is EB2 ... that's 18K full year demand for EB2 ROW. That translates into full year 36K demand (roughly) for 485. Then there is already 11K ROW inventory. So if USCIS wishes to full throttle on then ROW may yield actually zero SOFAD. Even if we assume that Q4 labor will NOT translate into 485.... that still makes this number 27K+11K = 38K which is more than the quota.



TOTAL (OCT 2010 to MAR 2011) PERM COUNT (Certified and Certified-Expired) : 35,204

INDIA COUNT : 17,830

CHINA COUNT : 2115

So based on the above, Approximate PERM ROW Count(EB2 + EB3) : 15,000 for Six months (OCT 2010 to MAR 2011)

[bieber]

gcseeker and others

I want to participate in the political/economic discussion and how they relate to immigration and govt policy. I think this thread is slowly diverting away and we should open a separate thread.

[gcseeker]

Bieber

I am glad you did not take my inputs the wrong way .I will be more than happy to participate in a discussion involving the same.I strongly beleive the political/economic side of things is an crucial cog in the wheel of immigration and discussion involving that will also help temper the expectations of some of the applicants.At the very least it will add some more information.

Also I agree this wonderful thread can get diverted with these posts.Let us start a separate specific thread to discuss these.


gcseeker and others

I want to participate in the political/economic discussion and how they relate to immigration and govt policy. I think this thread is slowly diverting away and we should open a separate thread.

[bieber]

Q

I hope one or more of ur assumptions will be wrong (i'm sure you want same)

1. For EB2 Row, 485/Perm ratio is 2:1 (I read somewhere in this thread, it's 1.3)

2. Every perm will have an approved 140 and 485

3 . 60% of perms are EB2.

on a side note, those 17k India perms will atleast turn into 25k I485 inventory, if every year adds this kind of numbers no matter what, the prospects are not encouraging

[qesehmk]

Bieber

I seriously hope my assumptions are wrong. Would welcome corrections...
As per opening another thread for soft topics (i.e. not related to hard data) ... anybody is welcome to open any thread. No worries. Needless to say I will participate too.


Q

I hope one or more of ur assumptions will be wrong (i'm sure you want same)

1. For EB2 Row, 485/Perm ratio is 2:1 (I read somewhere in this thread, it's 1.3)

2. Every perm will have an approved 140 and 485

3 . 60% of perms are EB2.

on a side note, those 17k India perms will atleast turn into 25k I485 inventory, if every year adds this kind of numbers no matter what, the prospects are not encouraging

[kd2008]

With a EB2-I PD of very late Q3 of 2010, I am expecting to be current in Q3 of 2017 at the earliest with the current trend. Who knows after that when it will be for GC. I hope I stick around till then.

[anuran]

bieber:

Over the last few days, this thread is been involved in an immense undertaking to data-mine the perm data. The outcome reveled a significant setback to EB2 movement in the near future. You have exactly listed some the points that I have been hoping would also turn out be less sharper that it seems to be. Especially the percentage of EB2s in the perm data. I am also hoping the PWMB numbers would turn out to be not as bad as it seems. But I do not think PWMB numbers will be forgiving and my hopes will be in vain. China did have a bit longer current status in July 07 than India and that did permit them to overtake the number of applications filed by India. That only goes to show that there is a lot more EB2I PWMB to come. Hoping for the best.

[anuran]

With a EB2-I PD of very late Q3 of 2010, I am expecting to be current in Q3 of 2017 at the earliest with the current trend. Who knows after that when it will be for GC. I hope I stick around till then.

Oh dear, just as I was getting ready to bike my way home. Now I am gonna weep all the way to my bed. :(

[admin]

Spec (and all)

I posted the trackitt trends and a simple model based on that trend in the FACTS AND DATA forum. It points to 32K SOFAD in addition to IC quota.

Take a look and let me know if we need to add / change

[soggadu]

guys... if the sofad is around 32K then we can definitely see the dates move towards Dec 07 and then retrogress back if needed. Also,remember....there were emails from NVC to pay 794$ for 485 CP even for guys with priority date Nov 07... what do you guys say...

[angryclubs]

Spec (and all)

I posted the trackitt trends and a simple model based on that trend in the FACTS AND DATA forum. It points to 32K SOFAD in addition to IC quota.

Take a look and let me know if we need to add / change

Either I am drunk and do not understand the 32K conclusion OR I am sober and I find the math wrong: 16 + 0 + 6 + 2 + 7 -4 + 0 + 8 = 35K

Why is it showing 32K? Posting here because I did not see a reply link in the facts and data subforum.

[qesehmk]

AC only add up the green color. That will give you 32.

That section doesn't have reply all on purpose. So that we only use it to post factual data and if somebody wants to discuss we can do it here.


Either I am drunk and do not understand the 32K conclusion OR I am sober and I find the math wrong: 16 + 0 + 6 + 2 + 7 -4 + 0 + 8 = 35K

Why is it showing 32K? Posting here because I did not see a reply link in the facts and data subforum.

[angryclubs]

Thanks for clarifying Q. Makes sense. My BP is rising each day because I find myself on the edge. EB2I PD March7, 2007.

[qesehmk]

Keep figers crossed ... mine is mar 27 07 :cool:


Thanks for clarifying Q. Makes sense. My BP is rising each day because I find myself on the edge. EB2I PD March7, 2007.

[pch053]

Q,
You (and people w/Feb/March'07) are almost on a knife edge where it can go either way; hope your PD can squeeze through by the end of Sep'11. My PD is July'07 and I am hoping to be current by Aug-Sep'12.

[TeluguBidda]

Q,
You (and people w/Feb/March'07) are almost on a knife edge where it can go either way; hope your PD can squeeze through by the end of Sep'11. My PD is July'07 and I am hoping to be current by Aug-Sep'12.

My PD is 12/02/2006 (EB2-I) and I heard quite discouraging update from my Attorney. In the past, any updates from my Attorney related to immigration have been spot-on, so really worried. Gosh, this wait sucks !

[donvar]

My PD is 12/02/2006 (EB2-I) and I heard quite discouraging update from my Attorney. In the past, any updates from my Attorney related to immigration have been spot-on, so really worried. Gosh, this wait sucks !

What updates have your heard?

[TeluguBidda]

What updates have your heard?

#1 There is increased activity in EB-2 due to denials / rejections in EB-1, thus compelling people to "move down" to EB-2 and apply. When DOS said that there are 12000+ visas from EB-1, people got ecstatic without realizing that they will apply in EB-2 instead. Net result, almost no spillover from EB-2

#2 People migrating from EB-3 to EB-2 is very close to 10,000

#3 EB-2 will not cross November 2006

The Attorney is not known for sharing predictions or feelings, but only facts and they have always proved to be true.

[bieber]

Telugubidda

in the last visa bulletin, there was a sentence that I quoted to Teddy in this thread which gives you an idea, there will be definitely some spill across possible from EB2-ROW. This is after DOS considering the porting.

[leo07]

TeluguBidda, Thanks for sharing information.

With all due respect, I'm not sure about (1) and so, I must say that (3) is also not very accurate.
Here is the reason for (1): Your Attorney is right that rejections in EB1 will spike Eb2. However, that will not impact the dates movement at all. Almost NILL. Reason: EB1 had always been current, so people who fall back will fall back behind the current EB2-folks. Yes, you must count EB2-ROW, but again, that's not going to matter much for this year.

with that explanation, (3) could be way off

My 2cents...


#1 There is increased activity in EB-2 due to denials / rejections in EB-1, thus compelling people to "move down" to EB-2 and apply. When DOS said that there are 12000+ visas from EB-1, people got ecstatic without realizing that they will apply in EB-2 instead. Net result, almost no spillover from EB-2

#2 People migrating from EB-3 to EB-2 is very close to 10,000

#3 EB-2 will not cross November 2006

The Attorney is not known for sharing predictions or feelings, but only facts and they have always proved to be true.

[skpanda]

Even if people file in EB2 instead of EB1 (#1 in your post), is that a concern? They would have a PD in 2010/2011. Unless ofcourse if they can port their EB1 PD. I do not think many people will have PD in 2006/2007 for EB1 and have rejections/denials after 3 or 4 years since EB1 has been current for a while.

Am i missing something?



#1 There is increased activity in EB-2 due to denials / rejections in EB-1, thus compelling people to "move down" to EB-2 and apply. When DOS said that there are 12000+ visas from EB-1, people got ecstatic without realizing that they will apply in EB-2 instead. Net result, almost no spillover from EB-2

#2 People migrating from EB-3 to EB-2 is very close to 10,000

#3 EB-2 will not cross November 2006

The Attorney is not known for sharing predictions or feelings, but only facts and they have always proved to be true.

[vishnu]

yes, in references in bieber's post, the last vb did make references to unused numbers from eb1 and eb2 - unlikely they would include eb2 unless they were certain of some fall across...

[TeluguBidda]

Even if people file in EB2 instead of EB1 (#1 in your post), is that a concern? They would have a PD in 2010/2011. Unless ofcourse if they can port their EB1 PD. I do not think many people will have PD in 2006/2007 for EB1 and have rejections/denials after 3 or 4 years since EB1 has been current for a while.

Am i missing something?

EB-2 ROW always has been current. So, people who intended to apply in EB-1 with current priority dates will be able to do the same in EB-2. Please note, I was not referring to EB-2IC earlier, I was referring to EB-2 as a whole

[qesehmk]

It matters when the people filing are ROW because EB2 ROW has always been current.

Having said that I think not all EB1 can find an employer to file EB2. Secondly 25% of EB1 or IC. Thirdly porting couldn't be that high because we need to see corresponding EB3 reduction at some point of time.

However, I do think that there is a significant risk because just looking at PERM numbers EB2ROW can produce sufficient demand within the category.

Now if ROW yields 0 to EB2IC, EB2IC can still have 12-16K from EB1 and upto 8K from EB5. That will barely move the date to nov-dec 06 as TB's lawyer said.

Trackitt trend today however does point to 32K net SOFAD rather than 20-24K net SOFAD. Which makes Mar-Apr a possibility. Question is will we see ramp up in EB2 ROW approvals. We will continue to update "FACTS and DATA" section. Meanwhile ... somebody if you know how to figure out EB4/5 consumption pls let us know.



Even if people file in EB2 instead of EB1 (#1 in your post), is that a concern? They would have a PD in 2010/2011. Unless ofcourse if they can port their EB1 PD. I do not think many people will have PD in 2006/2007 for EB1 and have rejections/denials after 3 or 4 years since EB1 has been current for a while.

Am i missing something?

[donvar]

#1 There is increased activity in EB-2 due to denials / rejections in EB-1, thus compelling people to "move down" to EB-2 and apply. When DOS said that there are 12000+ visas from EB-1, people got ecstatic without realizing that they will apply in EB-2 instead. Net result, almost no spillover from EB-2

#2 People migrating from EB-3 to EB-2 is very close to 10,000

#3 EB-2 will not cross November 2006

The Attorney is not known for sharing predictions or feelings, but only facts and they have always proved to be true.

Thanks. I wanted to hear any facts about porting numbers as this is something our Gurus aren't sure because lack of data.

Personally , I believe who have PD till July 2007 will some how sail through but people after that will be stuck in unending retrogression.

[TeluguBidda]

Trackitt trend today however does point to 32K net SOFAD rather than 20-24K net SOFAD. Which makes Mar-Apr a possibility. Question is will we see ramp up in EB2 ROW approvals. We will continue to update "FACTS and DATA" section. Meanwhile ... somebody if you know how to figure out EB4/5 consumption pls let us know.

I personally feel that Trackitt data is miniscule and therefore cannot be extrapolated to capture statistics. History is testimonial to that conclusion. We should ask ourselves, "Did our predictions come true in Visa bulletins anywhere close, anytime in the past". My answer is NO.

We need (a) Used up EB #s and preferably FB #s from DOS, preferably, by Category if not Country-wise; (b) Pending EB inventory from USCIS (including local office #s); (c) Pending EB inventory at Consular posts and finally; (d) DOL numbers from the current fiscal year.

It is tough to understand why DOS does not publish "used up" #s, unless my knowledge is limited.

[shaumack]

We can live in as much denial as we want and keep on crunching numbers as per our vested interest. End of the day, truth is every lawyer in the town thinks that porting numbers are high and also DOS believes upgrade demand was worthwhile mentioning in the bulletin. Yes there may be a gimmick over here that lawyers want more business, but with every forum post of successful EB3 to EB2 porting, every 10 new people have either became aware of it or started looking into this option. People wo are not on forum get to learn about this from their friends and their success story.

The whole point is why DOS went and looked into EB1 demand so early in the year. Whether there was a concern that available annual visa number were far less then to meet current upgrade demand and hence Mr. Big O thought .. hey let me check with USCIS on EB1 demand and see if we have something available that we can use now else I have to retrogress EB2-I.

[qesehmk]

Trackitt data is statistically very significant and quite reliable from understanding consumption. However what it doesn't do is: "It can't forecast how USCIS will or will not accelerate consumption in certain categories". So that is the fair limitation on it.

If you followed this thread from its old location last year you will see that we defied the USCIS's assertion that the dates will NOT move beyond sep 2005. We were already predicting dates between Jun 06 and Feb 07 last year. Eventually the date fell in May 06. And this also wouldn't have happened if USCIS didn't do massive PERM cleanup.

So again the core problem in any forecasting remains the same .... HOW to PREDICT FUTURE BEHAVIOR ESPECIALLY WHEN THE OUTCOME IS A FUNCTION OF POLICY RATHER THAN MARKET DYNAMICS. You can put variables on market dynamics. You can't put variables on whats going in somebody's mind (in this case USCIS)!

So publishing how much visas are used until today doesn't do much good since USCIS can and will if they want to accelerate processing in certain categories vs others. They have enough levers to serve whatever policy objective they are trying to fulfil.


I personally feel that Trackitt data is miniscule and therefore cannot be extrapolated to capture statistics. History is testimonial to that conclusion. We should ask ourselves, "Did our predictions come true in Visa bulletins anywhere close, anytime in the past". My answer is NO.

We need (a) Used up EB #s and preferably FB #s from DOS, preferably, by Category if not Country-wise; (b) Pending EB inventory from USCIS (including local office #s); (c) Pending EB inventory at Consular posts and finally; (d) DOL numbers from the current fiscal year.

It is tough to understand why DOS does not publish "used up" #s, unless my knowledge is limited.

[anuran]

Meanwhile ... somebody if you know how to figure out EB4/5 consumption pls let us know.

The only way I can think of is by looking at the completions for I-360 and I-526 using the "National Processing and Trends" data at http://dashboard.uscis.gov/index.cfm?formtype=18&office=71&charttype=1. It has data till Feb'11.

I-360 completions = 5010 till Feb-11, i.e. 5 months (Quota is 10000) So, I think it is going to be exhausted -> Zero spillover.
I-526 completions = 425 till Feb-11, i.e. 5 months (Quota is 10000 again). Therefore even if it hits 1500, leftovers might be 8.5k.

Please correct me if I am totally wrong.

[TeluguBidda]

Trackitt data is statistically very significant and quite reliable from understanding consumption. However what it doesn't do is: "It can't forecast how USCIS will or will not accelerate consumption in certain categories". So that is the fair limitation on it.

If you followed this thread from its old location last year you will see that we defied the USCIS's assertion that the dates will NOT move beyond sep 2005. We were already predicting dates between Jun 06 and Feb 07 last year. Eventually the date fell in May 06. And this also wouldn't have happened if USCIS didn't do massive PERM cleanup.

So again the core problem in any forecasting remains the same .... HOW to PREDICT FUTURE BEHAVIOR ESPECIALLY WHEN THE OUTCOME IS A FUNCTION OF POLICY RATHER THAN MARKET DYNAMICS. You can put variables on market dynamics. You can't put variables on whats going in somebody's mind (in this case USCIS)!

So publishing how much visas are used until today doesn't do much good since USCIS can and will if they want to accelerate processing in certain categories vs others. They have enough levers to serve whatever policy objective they are trying to fulfil.

Well said, regarding policy implementation, etc. I am in agreement.

I find it tough to agree on Trackitt reliance. Simply because the # of people having profiles is less than 1% of all people waiting to get GC. Thus, I feel that the total is statistically not significant (or reliable) enough to compute and conclude. May be I am wrong and that is okay, I can live with ignorance as I have lived that way all along due to endless wait on the GC.

[qesehmk]

TB all of us are frustrated. I think personally it has helped me to be in a forum and talk with others similar to me. The good thing is by now we all are mature enough to know that things can go eitherway and people no loger chase visa bulletins the way they used to do earlier. Interestingly Teddy made this observation with me the other day and I must credit the observation to him!

Regarding statistically significant .. I am not a statistician but what i remember is .... it has to do with size rather than %. Whatever little statistic I did Loooooooooong back in 1992 ... I remember that sometimes you can predict behavior of an infinite distribution just by having 27 neutral data points! The size of course varies as per what tests or distributions you are trying to predict.


Well said, regarding policy implementation, etc. I am in agreement.

I find it tough to agree on Trackitt reliance. Simply because the # of people having profiles is less than 1% of all people waiting to get GC. Thus, I feel that the total is statistically not significant (or reliable) enough to compute and conclude. May be I am wrong and that is okay, I can live with ignorance as I have lived that way all along due to endless wait on the GC.

[gcwait2007]

AC only add up the green color. That will give you 32.

That section doesn't have reply all on purpose. So that we only use it to post factual data and if somebody wants to discuss we can do it here.

Q,

Thankful if you or any one provide me break-up of arriving at 32. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Thanks,
gcw07

[anuran]

Thankful if you or any one provide me break-up of arriving at 32.

You mean break it up beyond what is here?
http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?53-Trackitt-trend-amp-sofad-projections&p=1716#post1716

[gcwait2007]

You mean break it up beyond what is here?
http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php?53-Trackitt-trend-amp-sofad-projections&p=1716#post1716

Thank you, anuran.

[shaumack]

Regarding statistically significant .. I am not a statistician but what i remember is .... it has to do with size rather than %. Whatever little statistic I did Loooooooooong back in 1992 ... I remember that sometimes you can predict behavior of an infinite distribution just by having 27 neutral data points! The size of course varies as per what tests or distributions you are trying to predict.

27 neutral data points will work if you can live with 19% margin of error (confidence interval) under entire population of 40,000 with 95% confidence level. In order to have 5% margin of error for 40,000 people (annual quota on any category) with 95% confidence level, which is common in statistics, you will need sample size of atleast 381. So in your SOFAD calculation based on trackitt, EB2-ROW data has enough samples to predict normal distribution. So 28,000 could turn into real demand if trackitt data will convert into YTD data you predict. Sample size would change by 2 for 28,800 visas.

[qesehmk]

with every forum post of successful EB3 to EB2 porting, every 10 new people have either became aware of it or started looking into this option.
... I think its not that easy that 10K of all retrogressed people can have their employer agree to upgrade which essentially is nothing but filing an entire new labor + perm.

The whole point is why DOS went and looked into EB1 demand so early in the year. Whether there was a concern that available annual visa number were far less then to meet current upgrade demand
I think you make a good point here. That could be the reason.



The only way I can think of is by looking at the completions for I-360 and I-526 using the "National Processing and Trends" data at http://dashboard.uscis.gov/index.cfm?formtype=18&office=71&charttype=1. It has data till Feb'11.

I-360 completions = 5010 till Feb-11, i.e. 5 months (Quota is 10000) So, I think it is going to be exhausted -> Zero spillover.
I-526 completions = 425 till Feb-11, i.e. 5 months (Quota is 10000 again). Therefore even if it hits 1500, leftovers might be 8.5k.

Please correct me if I am totally wrong.

Thanks. I-360 situation looks hopeless. One can't expect anything there. I-526 looks equally promising as last year. So 8K doesn't sound far fetched.


27 neutral data points will work if you can live with 19% margin of error (confidence interval) under entire population of 40,000 with 95% confidence level. In order to have 5% margin of error for 40,000 people (annual quota on any category) with 95% confidence level, which is common in statistics, you will need sample size of atleast 381. So in your SOFAD calculation based on trackitt, EB2-ROW data has enough samples to predict normal distribution. So 28,000 could turn into real demand if trackitt data will convert into YTD data you predict. Sample size would change by 2 for 28,800 visas.

Thanks Shaumack.. good info.

[Spectator]

I find it tough to agree on Trackitt reliance. Simply because the # of people having profiles is less than 1% of all people waiting to get GC. Thus, I feel that the total is statistically not significant (or reliable) enough to compute and conclude. May be I am wrong and that is okay, I can live with ignorance as I have lived that way all along due to endless wait on the GC.

TeluguBidda,

There was a recent thread about this on Trackitt. I haven't checked the exact figures, but they sound about right.


Based on last years approvals for Employment Based cases:

EB1 - < 1%

EB2-I - 7%
EB2-C - < 1%
EB2-P - 1%
EB2-ROW - 2%

EB3-I - 4%
EB3-C - < 1%
EB3-P - < 1%
EB3-ROW - c. 1%

Mexico numbers are insignificant.

Certainly, EB2-ROW has stood up remarkably well in the past, as far as consistency and predicting approvals goes.

[gcwait2007]

Keep figers crossed ... mine is mar 27 07 :cool:

Mine is 02/20/2007. Whenever I think about the PD and the edge, I am getting
anxiety:( So I am forcing myself to think about something else, other than GC.

[veni001]

Mine is 02/20/2007. Whenever I think about the PD and the edge, I am getting
anxiety:( So I am forcing myself to think about something else, other than GC.

gcwait2007,
Don't worry you will get a chance this year!

[veni001]

Certainly, EB2-ROW has stood up remarkably well in the past, as far as consistency and predicting approvals goes.

Spec,
Agree,

Just to add South Korea Case(may not be related to the discussion)
FY 2010 - PERM certifications = 4,610
FY 2011 - 1/2 Year PERM certifications = 1,899

[shaumack]

Spec,
Agree,

Just to add South Korea Case(may not be related to the discussion)
FY 2010 - PERM certifications = 4,610
FY 2011 - 1/2 Year PERM certifications = 1,899

South Korea is consistently using more visa numbers than 5600 (EB2 +EB3) but they are still not classified as retrogressed country which is quite unfair. But I think at one point Spec talked about under utilized visa numbers by S.Korea in FB category and how it is justified. But this is unfair to other ROW countries I guess.

[veni001]

South Korea is consistently using more visa numbers than 5600 (EB2 +EB3) but they are still not classified as retrogressed country which is quite unfair. But I think at one point Spec talked about under utilized visa numbers by S.Korea in FB category and how it is justified. But this is unfair to other ROW countries I guess.

shaumack,
DOS/USCIS definition (interpretation) of retrogression is based on total (EB+FB) approvals{7% of (226k+140k)} than just one. As long as their interpretation is valid all non-retrogressed countries(not only South Korea) can get as much EB2 allocation as possible!

[gcwait2007]

gcwait2007,
Don't worry you will get a chance this year!

Thank you, veni001, for your comforting words.

[kd2008]

With a EB2-I PD of very late Q3 of 2010, I am expecting to be current in Q3 of 2017 at the earliest with the current trend. Who knows after that when it will be for GC. I hope I stick around till then.

Last night, I got my I-140 approval email. Now I wish ALL categories are current in June bulletin. :D

I know its not gonna happen. But its good to hope, I guess.

[gcwait2007]

I feel that the following would be the demand data for June 2011:

Prior to China India Others GT
January 1, 2006 0 0 0 0
January 1, 2007 3,700 10,500 0 14,200
January 1, 2008 9,000 20,300 0 29,300
January 1, 2011 9,100 20,400 100 29,600

In the month of May 2011, 3000 EB2 India and China GCs were issued.

As per estimate, PWMB prior to Jan 1, 2007 is almost zero. The number will not exceed 100 according to some sample data. EB3 to EB2 India upgrade is estimated to be about 20%, for the year 2006. Total number of EB3 pending cases for 2006 is 10,726 and 30% works out to 3300.

To complete 2006 and cross into 2007, SOFAD required = 14200+100+3300 = 17600.

I hope with SOFAD estimated, EB2 India and China would reach March 2007.

[veni001]

I feel that the following would be the demand data for June 2011:

Prior to China India Others GT
January 1, 2006 0 0 0 0
January 1, 2007 3,700 10,500 0 14,200
January 1, 2008 9,000 20,300 0 29,300
January 1, 2011 9,100 20,400 100 29,600

In the month of May 2011, 3000 EB2 India and China GCs were issued.

As per estimate, PWMB prior to Jan 1, 2007 is almost zero. The number will not exceed 100 according to some sample data. EB3 to EB2 India upgrade is estimated to be about 20%, for the year 2006. Total number of EB3 pending cases for 2006 is 10,726 and 30% works out to 3300.

To complete 2006 and cross into 2007, SOFAD required = 14200+100+3300 = 17600.

I hope with SOFAD estimated, EB2 India and China would reach March 2007.

gcwait2007,
You mean 20% or 30%?

For 20% EBI3-->EBI2 porting(2003-2006) numbers 4k (6k for 30%) out of the 17,830 PERM certifications from first half of of FY2011 must be porting PERMs.

Since EB1 is down by 70% and assuming all those reflect in new PERM cases for FY 2011 as EB2 means (about 2K) significant reduction in new IND EB filings?

[Spectator]

After one week (which is 5 working days) there have been 59 primary applicant approvals for EB2-I.

This represents 962 approvals in the real world. There are probably a few more yet to be reported.

Since there are 21 working days in May, the prorated approvals for the entire month becomes 4,040.

TK's figure of 4.5k looks pretty good at the moment.

[shaumack]

shaumack,
DOS/USCIS definition (interpretation) of retrogression is based on total (EB+FB) approvals{7% of (226k+140k)} than just one. As long as their interpretation is valid all non-retrogressed countries(not only South Korea) can get as much EB2 allocation as possible!

Thanks veni. I was missing this information. I went back and checked past visa bulletins and one of it mentioned this in detail which clarifies doubts on South Korea.


Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed. Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however.

Applicability of Section 202(a)(5): INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act, removed the per-country limit on Employment-based immigrants in any calendar quarter in which applicant demand for numbers in one or more Employment-based preferences is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5) has allowed countries such as China – mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused. Such numbers are provided strictly in priority date order without regard to the foreign state chargeability, and the same cut-off date applies to any country benefiting from this provision.

Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)

Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, “2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.” The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.

Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:

If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state’s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. 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.

[veni001]

After one week (which is 5 working days) there have been 59 primary applicant approvals for EB2-I.

This represents 962 approvals in the real world. There are probably a few more yet to be reported.

Since there are 21 working days in May, the prorated approvals for the entire month becomes 4,040.

TK's figure of 4.5k looks pretty good at the moment.

Spec,
Very good information, assuming that USCIS did not release all 12K EB1 unused VISAS from Q1&Q2(due to 27% usage limit) in May, we should see another 2 month movement for June, and hopefully last quarter(July-Aug-Sept) will see similar to FY2010 PD movement for EB2I&C!

[gcwait2007]

gcwait2007,
You mean 20% or 30%?

For 20% EBI3-->EBI2 porting(2003-2006) numbers 4k (6k for 30%) out of the 17,830 PERM certifications from first half of of FY2011 must be porting PERMs.

Since EB1 is down by 70% and assuming all those reflect in new PERM cases for FY 2011 as EB2 means (about 2K) significant reduction in new IND EB filings?

sorry for the typo. Should be read as 20%. The new portings would be 2200.

[qesehmk]

Spec

I posted the trackitt trend and the predictions based on them (if the trend were to hold) about 2 days back.

I can post your material as is: but to avoid redundant postings .. would you mind taking a look at what I posted and then accordingly either suggest me something or adjust your material.

Also its important that we include sometakeaway for people along with facts and figures for people to easily grasp what teh facts convey.

p.s. - Regarding admin stuff ... its some work to keep it closed and yet make entries yourself. I can make you admin if you want. That way you can make the changes yourself.

[Spectator]

Spec

I posted the trackitt trend and the predictions based on them (if the trend were to hold) about 2 days back.

I can post your material as is: but to avoid redundant postings .. would you mind taking a look at what I posted and then accordingly either suggest me something or adjust your material.

Also its important that we include sometakeaway for people along with facts and figures for people to easily grasp what teh facts convey.

p.s. - Regarding admin stuff ... its some work to keep it closed and yet make entries yourself. I can make you admin if you want. That way you can make the changes yourself.

Q,

I saw what you posted at the time and it is excellent.

In my opinion this is different, since it is not trying to extrapolate to SOFAD, merely looking at Trackitt trends. I believe it is complimentary, but different.

It is data that number crunchers might appreciate, rather than the general population. For instance, it is easy to see the different numbers for October 2009 versus October 2010, or whether some months had particularly high approvals.

It is looking at where we have reached and how we reached this point, rather than where we will end up at the end of the year. I think that is the best explanation I can think of at the moment. Going forward, the tables would show progress up to and through spillover season.

If you don't think it it is suitable for that section, I am fine with that.

The explanation of what the tables represent precedes the actual tables themselves.

I suspect if you are asking the question, then it probably is not what you had in mind.

I'll leave the posts for a few days - maybe others want to comment. After that, I will delete them, because I think they take up too much room in the EB2 forum.

[veni001]

Q,

I saw what you posted at the time and it is excellent.

In my opinion this is different, since it is not trying to extrapolate to SOFAD, merely looking at Trackitt trends. I believe it is complimentary, but different.

It is data that number crunchers might appreciate, rather than the general population. For instance, it is easy to see the different numbers for October 2009 versus October 2010, or whether some months had particularly high approvals.

It is looking at where we have reached and how we reached this point, rather than where we will end up at the end of the year. I think that is the best explanation I can think of at the moment. Going forward, the tables would show progress up to and through spillover season.

If you don't think it it is suitable for that section, I am fine with that.

The explanation of what the tables represent precedes the actual tables themselves.

I suspect if you are asking the question, then it probably is not what you had in mind.

I'll leave the posts for a few days - maybe others want to comment. After that, I will delete them, because I think they take up too much room in the EB2 forum.

Spec,
Let's hope the number hold good for the remainder of FY 2011!

Even at 55% reduction EB1 will yield 22k, interestingly EB2-ROW did not show significant jump to compensate EB1 reduction. If it goes to 125% by Q4 (hope not) then it will not yield any. If EB4-EB5 hold the same level then we should see 32K overall SOFAD (in addition to 6K EB2I&C regular).

Overall unknowns of unknowns is porting numbers(?)

[admin]

Spec

I posted your info there. Let me know if you want to change anything.


Q,

I saw what you posted at the time and it is excellent.

In my opinion this is different, since it is not trying to extrapolate to SOFAD, merely looking at Trackitt trends. I believe it is complimentary, but different.

It is data that number crunchers might appreciate, rather than the general population. For instance, it is easy to see the different numbers for October 2009 versus October 2010, or whether some months had particularly high approvals.

It is looking at where we have reached and how we reached this point, rather than where we will end up at the end of the year. I think that is the best explanation I can think of at the moment. Going forward, the tables would show progress up to and through spillover season.

If you don't think it it is suitable for that section, I am fine with that.

The explanation of what the tables represent precedes the actual tables themselves.

I suspect if you are asking the question, then it probably is not what you had in mind.

I'll leave the posts for a few days - maybe others want to comment. After that, I will delete them, because I think they take up too much room in the EB2 forum.

[soggadu]

Spec,
Let's hope the number hold good for the remainder of FY 2011!

Even at 55% reduction EB1 will yield 22k, interestingly EB2-ROW did not show significant jump to compensate EB1 reduction. If it goes to 125% by Q4 (hope not) then it will not yield any. If EB4-EB5 hold the same level then we should see 32K overall SOFAD (in addition to 6K EB2I&C regular).



Overall unknowns of unknowns is porting numbers(?)

Veni.... From your calculations of Eb1 and from facts section the sofad would be 38k.... So please tell me why we can't expect the date to move after July 07.... From old demand data sheets I see that prior to 2008 we have back log of 32k for india and china combined.... And porting is supposed to be at 6k at max as we havent seen the dates retrogress.... In this scenario CIS has to move dates beyond July 07 in order to use all the demand rather than move it till mar 07 in which case pwmb gang can apply but can't be processed during this fiscal year....

So... I think dates will move towards dec 07 and then retrogress.... What do you all think??

[veni001]

Veni.... From your calculations of Eb1 and from facts section the sofad would be 38k.... So please tell me why we can't expect the date to move after July 07.... From old demand data sheets I see that prior to 2008 we have back log of 32k for india and china combined.... And porting is supposed to be at 6k at max as we havent seen the dates retrogress.... In this scenario CIS has to move dates beyond July 07 in order to use all the demand rather than move it till mar 07 in which case pwmb gang can apply but can't be processed during this fiscal year....

So... I think dates will move towards dec 07 and then retrogress.... What do you all think??

soggadu,
Assume the demand stays the same for the remainder of FY 2011, one thing every one not able to get handle (including DOS/USCIS) is porting numbers. If the porting numbers (more or less) stay the same as FY 2010 then dates will move post July 2007 and retrogress back in Oct 2011, based on PWMB cases filed.

[soggadu]

soggadu,
Assume the demand stays the same for the remainder of FY 2011, one thing every one not able to get handle (including DOS/USCIS) is porting numbers. If the porting numbers (more or less) stay the same as FY 2010 then dates will move post July 2007 and retrogress back in Oct 2011, based on PWMB cases filed.

Veni.... Just wondering.... If porting numbers are really that big then EB2 dates might have retrogressed as Q mentioned before right....

[veni001]

Veni.... Just wondering.... If porting numbers are really that big then EB2 dates might have retrogressed as Q mentioned before right....

soggadu,
Agree... but DOS/USCIS wants to play safe until Q4!
Let's hope for the best.

[Spectator]

Spec,
Let's hope the number hold good for the remainder of FY 2011!

Even at 55% reduction EB1 will yield 22k, interestingly EB2-ROW did not show significant jump to compensate EB1 reduction. If it goes to 125% by Q4 (hope not) then it will not yield any. If EB4-EB5 hold the same level then we should see 32K overall SOFAD (in addition to 6K EB2I&C regular).

Overall unknowns of unknowns is porting numbers(?)
Veni,

Let's hope so. That is certainly the best scenario.

On figures to the end of April, simplistically, 13.7 / 7 * 12 = 23.6k or 16.4k from EB1.

If the underlying trend is more like 60% then that only gives around 14.5k from EB1.

The other fact is that whilst in the real world, India represented only 16.4% of EB1 approvals in FY2010, whilst in Trackitt they represent 63.2% of EB1 approvals. This means there is a danger that the Trackitt data is skewed. Indian approvals are running at 54.1% of last year and the underlying trend is nearer 70%.

There are many ways to look at the raw data.

Everything is in the interpretation, which is why I deliberately did not include any projections to year end.

EB1 has been very patchy with approvals - very few for a several months then a glut in April. Were USCIS carrying out "Kazarian" training?

I still find it extremely difficult to forecast where EB1 will end up.

[veni001]

Veni,

Let's hope so. That is certainly the best scenario.

On figures to the end of April, simplistically, 13.7 / 7 * 12 = 23.6k or 16.4k from EB1.

If the underlying trend is more like 60% then that only gives around 14.5k from EB1.

The other fact is that whilst in the real world, India represented only 16.4% of EB1 approvals in FY2010, whilst in Trackitt they represent 63.2% of EB1 approvals. This means there is a danger that the Trackitt data is skewed. Indian approvals are running at 54.1% of last year and the underlying trend is nearer 70%.

There are many ways to look at the raw data.

Everything is in the interpretation, which is why I deliberately did not include any projections to year end.

EB1 has been very patchy with approvals - very few for a several months then a glut in April. Were USCIS carrying out "Kazarian" training?

I still find it extremely difficult to forecast where EB1 will end up.

Spec,
Please check post #1387.
I don't think EB1 will be at 70% of last year at any cost. The reason for my confidence is please check the number of PERM approvals vs no. of i-140 receipts for last two quarters/one year, the difference should represent EB1(irrespective of country, and also add about 8K pending as of 10-01-2010). As long as this validates 70% claim, no questions asked.

[Spectator]

Spec,
Please check post #1387.
I don't think EB1 will be at 70% of last year at any cost. The reason for my confidence is please check the number of PERM approvals vs no. of i-140 receipts for last two quarters/one year, the difference should represent EB1(irrespective of country, and also add about 8K pending as of 10-01-2010). As long as this validates 70% claim, no questions asked.

Veni,

I wasn't trying to claim that that EB1 will reach 70% of last year's figures.

The figure merely highlights the disparity in Trackitt within EB1 and vindicates my decision not to include projections.

I will reiterate that it is raw data for people to make their own decision about. It is inevitable that we may all have different interpretations.

Personally, I do think EB1 approvals are likely somewhat higher than the simple % represents.

At this time, I don't know by how much.

Until I can understand this better, I am assuming no more than 16k from EB1 itself.

The figures to date do not suggest the 24k that some people have talked about, so I take CO's statement to mean at least 12k for the year, based on the trend in the first 6 months.

I consider myself to be continuing in blissful ignorance as far as EB1 is concerned. :)

[qesehmk]

Spec

You would be blissfully ignorant if you extrapolated 12K to 24K for EB1 and assumed thats going to be the pure EB1 SOFAD :)

clearly you didn't ...

Its so hard to predict even today since USCIS has all the tools to implement their policy. I guess what we can put in the bag is the fact that Nov 2006 is absolute certainty. Other than that ... it could be anywhere between nov 06 to all the way aug 2007. The maximum probability being around Mar 2007



Veni,

I wasn't trying to claim that that EB1 will reach 70% of last year's figures.

The figure merely highlights the disparity in Trackitt within EB1 and vindicates my decision not to include projections.

I will reiterate that it is raw data for people to make their own decision about. It is inevitable that we may all have different interpretations.

Personally, I do think EB1 approvals are likely somewhat higher than the simple % represents.

At this time, I don't know by how much.

Until I can understand this better, I am assuming no more than 16k from EB1 itself.

The figures to date do not suggest the 24k that some people have talked about, so I take CO's statement to mean at least 12k for the year, based on the trend in the first 6 months.

I consider myself to be continuing in blissful ignorance as far as EB1 is concerned. :)

[hsinghjkaur]

I have hardly seen demand data being released after 8th or 9th of the month... I hope that it is released today for June VB. Has anyone seen it being released after 10th in the past?

[veni001]

Veni,

I wasn't trying to claim that that EB1 will reach 70% of last year's figures.

The figure merely highlights the disparity in Trackitt within EB1 and vindicates my decision not to include projections.

I will reiterate that it is raw data for people to make their own decision about. It is inevitable that we may all have different interpretations.

Personally, I do think EB1 approvals are likely somewhat higher than the simple % represents.

At this time, I don't know by how much.

Until I can understand this better, I am assuming no more than 16k from EB1 itself.

The figures to date do not suggest the 24k that some people have talked about, so I take CO's statement to mean at least 12k for the year, based on the trend in the first 6 months.

I consider myself to be continuing in blissful ignorance as far as EB1 is concerned. :)

Thanks Spec

[veni001]

I have hardly seen demand data being released after 8th or 9th of the month... I hope that it is released today for June VB. Has anyone seen it being released after 10th in the past?

It can come out any time, just keep watching :)

[TeddyKoochu]

Spec & Veni here is a calculation on EB1 from Trackitt data. Spec I agree with you that the 12K appears to be full year. This is similar to the EB2 ROW calculation I did a few days back, I believe just in that case the lower figures should be extrapolated by an effectiveness factor. The biggest drawback of the Trackitt data that you pointed out is that its mostly for India however I thing that extrapolation should take care of that as the factor has been derived from historic data from the same source which will also be similarly skewed.

EB1-A + EB1-B + EB1-C
2009 - 98 + 191 + 267 = 556
2010 - 101 + 158 + 123 = 382

The Consumption for EB1 for 2009 and 2010 for EB1 was ~ 41K, in 2009 EB1 got spillover from EB5 of 1K whereas in 2010 the cap was higher and EB1 consumed 41K.

So efectiveness factor = 382 / 556 = 68%.

7 Months of FY 2010 - 74 + 123 + 89 = 286
7 Months of FY 2011 - 36 + 48 + 44 = 128

Now the projected consumption for EB1 is (128/286) * 41.5K ~ 18573.
However we should extrapolate this by the effectiveness factor 18573 * 100 / 68 = 27300.

This gives a projected fall down of 40K - 27.3K ~ 12.5K which is very similar to the 12K figure that has been in the news.

[qesehmk]

Teddy

What would you attribute the reduction in 2009-10 trackitt numbers for EB1 for same level of EB1 approvals?

I wonder if that is correlated with the EB1 cycle time. And if it is then I would check if teh cycle time reduced further between 10-11. Only then using an effectiveness factor would make sense.

Does it make sense?



Spec & Veni here is a calculation on EB1 from Trackitt data. Spec I agree with you that the 12K appears to be full year. This is similar to the EB2 ROW calculation I did a few days back, I believe just in that case the lower figures should be extrapolated by an effectiveness factor. The biggest drawback of the Trackitt data that you pointed out is that its mostly for India however I thing that extrapolation should take care of that as the factor has been derived from historic data from the same source which will also be similarly skewed.

EB1-A + EB1-B + EB1-C
2009 - 98 + 191 + 267 = 556
2010 - 101 + 158 + 123 = 382

The Consumption for EB1 for 2009 and 2010 for EB1 was ~ 41K, in 2009 EB1 got spillover from EB5 of 1K whereas in 2010 the cap was higher and EB1 consumed 41K.

So efectiveness factor = 382 / 556 = 68%.

7 Months of FY 2010 - 74 + 123 + 89 = 286
7 Months of FY 2011 - 36 + 48 + 44 = 128

Now the projected consumption for EB1 is (128/286) * 41.5K ~ 18573.
However we should extrapolate this by the effectiveness factor 18573 * 100 / 68 = 27300.

This gives a projected fall down of 40K - 27.3K ~ 12.5K which is very similar to the 12K figure that has been in the news.

[bieber]

Teddy

I think the effectiveness factor you calculated does not address the issue how it solves India concentration specifically in 2011. is there an assumption Trackitt data is actually shifting towards bigger India entries? even in that case the method you used is not solving the problem in my opinion. I'm just curious, didnot mean to say you are just wrong.

may be it's just unknown we can only know after the fact

[veni001]

Spec & Veni here is a calculation on EB1 from Trackitt data. Spec I agree with you that the 12K appears to be full year. This is similar to the EB2 ROW calculation I did a few days back, I believe just in that case the lower figures should be extrapolated by an effectiveness factor. The biggest drawback of the Trackitt data that you pointed out is that its mostly for India however I thing that extrapolation should take care of that as the factor has been derived from historic data from the same source which will also be similarly skewed.

EB1-A + EB1-B + EB1-C
2009 - 98 + 191 + 267 = 556
2010 - 101 + 158 + 123 = 382

The Consumption for EB1 for 2009 and 2010 for EB1 was ~ 41K, in 2009 EB1 got spillover from EB5 of 1K whereas in 2010 the cap was higher and EB1 consumed 41K.

So efectiveness factor = 382 / 556 = 68%.

7 Months of FY 2010 - 74 + 123 + 89 = 286
7 Months of FY 2011 - 36 + 48 + 44 = 128

Now the projected consumption for EB1 is (128/286) * 41.5K ~ 18573.
However we should extrapolate this by the effectiveness factor 18573 * 100 / 68 = 27300.

This gives a projected fall down of 40K - 27.3K ~ 12.5K which is very similar to the 12K figure that has been in the news.

Teddy,
I don't think Mr. O translated 12k for the entire year!

In-any-event 27,300 translates to at least 12.5 k i-140 approvals or about 6.25K for the first two quarters of FY 2011.

Please see the PERM and i-140 receipts table for the last two quarters below and add the known EB1 demand as of 10-01-2010 (7.5k)

- Month -- ROW(2&3) ---EBI(2&3) ---EBC(2&3) --Monthly Total-- i140 Receipts
Oct-10 ----1,940 ------2,136 ---------231 ---------4,307 -------7,442
Nov-10 ----2,796 ------3,045 ---------350 ---------6,191 -------7,839
Dec-10 ----3,316 ------4,118 ---------423 ---------7,857 -------5,161
Jan-11 ----2,761 ------3,333 ---------447 ---------6,541 -------6,056
Feb-11 ----2,546 ------3,268 ---------383 ---------6,197 -------6,859
Mar-11 ----1,921 ------1,954 ---------279 ---------4,154 -------6,672 (estimated)
Total ----15,280 -----17,854 -------2,113 --------35,274 ------40,029

From this table FY 2011(Q1+Q2) EB1 i140 Receipts = 40,029 - 35,274 = 4,755

I am not exactly sure on EB1 i-140 success % but even if we take 80% success rate, it will translates to 8.3k demand.

Which means total known EB1 demand as of 04-01-2011 = 7.5k+8.3k= 15.8k

Assume the demand stay similar to first two quarters, add another 8.3k and assume 4k will be pending by 10-01-2011(based on processing time), then EB1 usage for this year will be around 20k?

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy

What would you attribute the reduction in 2009-10 trackitt numbers for EB1 for same level of EB1 approvals?

I wonder if that is correlated with the EB1 cycle time. And if it is then I would check if teh cycle time reduced further between 10-11. Only then using an effectiveness factor would make sense.

Does it make sense?

I agree with you cycle time maybe one way of justifying the usage of this factor. Though there are no published statistics of Eb1 cycle timings we do know that at the years end especially in 2010 a very conscious attempt was made to approve every possible EB1 case. Another thing is that if people know that the approval times are less they are less likely to track their cases so lower number of cases on Trackitt are not just lower but they should be suitably extrapolated, Iam using simple linear extrapolation based on historic data that may not be an exact function or variation trend but I feel that’s the best model we can fit things into. Another classic case is Eb1-C as you know these folks are the centre of a lot of anger so they will be less likely to put in their cases. This factor cannot address each of these things individually however at a broad level it is just an attempt to capture the trend.


Teddy

I think the effectiveness factor you calculated does not address the issue how it solves India concentration specifically in 2011. is there an assumption Trackitt data is actually shifting towards bigger India entries? even in that case the method you used is not solving the problem in my opinion. I'm just curious, didnot mean to say you are just wrong.

may be it's just unknown we can only know after the fact
Guys the effectiveness factor is just an attempt to extrapolate lower postings on Trackitt to an actual number.

Bieber this is how it addresses the fact that mostly its people from India who are putting in their cases, the trend of those historically putting in their cases proportionately should remain the same, so if folks from India are putting in their cases more in 2011 the same story should hold in 2010 and 2009. So by using the ratio of 2009 and 2010 which actually had the same number of approvals we can suitable extrapolate. Iam sure that the country wise distribution trend would be roughly the same.

[Spectator]

Veni,

Even just using last year's Trackitt %, there appear to have been 13.8k EB1 approvals to the end of April 2011.

At 20k total for the year, that would mean just 6.2k further approvals in the remaining 5 months of FY2011.

EB1 approvals picked up in March and April, accounting for 6.1k of those 13.8 k approvals.

Whilst I accept that approvals may dip again, I don't see them reducing to a level that would yield just 6.1k approvals for the rest of the year. Even the very low numbers seen for the 5 months October 2010-February 2011 would give nearly 8k additional approvals.

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy,
I don't think Mr. O translated 12k for the entire year!

In-any-event 27,300 translates to at least 12.5 k i-140 approvals or about 6.25K for the first two quarters of FY 2011.

Please see the PERM and i-140 receipts table for the last two quarters below and add the known EB1 demand as of 10-01-2010 (7.5k)

- Month -- ROW(2&3) ---EBI(2&3) ---EBC(2&3) --Monthly Total-- i140 Receipts
Oct-10 ----1,940 ------2,136 ---------231 ---------4,307 -------7,442
Nov-10 ----2,796 ------3,045 ---------350 ---------6,191 -------7,839
Dec-10 ----3,316 ------4,118 ---------423 ---------7,857 -------5,161
Jan-11 ----2,761 ------3,333 ---------447 ---------6,541 -------6,056
Feb-11 ----2,546 ------3,268 ---------383 ---------6,197 -------6,859
Mar-11 ----1,921 ------1,954 ---------279 ---------4,154 -------6,672 (estimated)
Total ----15,280 -----17,854 -------2,113 --------35,274 ------40,029

From this table FY 2011(Q1+Q2) EB1 i140 Receipts = 40,029 - 35,274 = 4,755

I am not exactly sure on EB1 i-140 success % but even if we take 80% success rate, it will translates to 8.3k demand.

Which means total known EB1 demand as of 04-01-2011 = 7.5k+8.3k= 15.8k

Assume the demand stay similar to first two quarters, add another 8.3k and assume 4k will be pending by 10-01-2011(based on processing time), then EB1 usage for this year will be around 20k?

Veni great approach. If I understand it correctly you are assuming that EB1 I40's are the only one that do not have a corresponding perm and based on the difference in the I140 receipts and perms you are computing the EB1 I140's. By extrapolating to all 4 quarters the calculation looks conservative as honestly the last quarter cases maybe borderline. Besides EB1 even EB2 NIW does not require perm however the numbers are small but this makes your calculation even more conservative, in fact this gives credibility that the 12K may well be half year. Your approach leads to a very different outcome it does look flawless.

[veni001]

Veni great approach. If I understand it correctly you are assuming that EB1 I40's are the only one that do not have a corresponding perm and based on the difference in the I140 receipts and perms you are computing the EB1 I140's. By extrapolating to all 4 quarters the calculation looks conservative as honestly the last quarter cases maybe borderline. Besides EB1 even EB2 NIW does not require perm however the numbers are small but this makes your calculation even more conservative, in fact this gives credibility that the 12K may well be half year. Your approach leads to a very different outcome it does look flawless.

Teddy,
I agree my approach was very conservative. For a realistic prediction EB1 i-140 success rate will be the determining factor, as we all know USCIS is scrutinizing EB1 to the fullest extent lately.

P.S: Agree EB2-NIW does not require PERM, but the % is very very less when compared to EB1/EB2 numbers.

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy,
I agree my approach was very conservative. For a realistic prediction EB1 i-140 success rate will be the determining factor, as we all know USCIS is scrutinizing EB1 to the fullest extent lately.

P.S: Agree EB2-NIW does not require PERM, but the % is very very less when compared to EB1/EB2 numbers.

Veni If I remove the factor from my calculation then the EB1 SOFAD comes pretty close to 20K same as you are calculating maybe adding the factor for EB1 is then too drastic however I feel its just a way to normalize lower numbers. However we can all definitely agree on 1 thing that we will get at least 12K from EB1 this year.

[veni001]

Veni If I remove the factor from my calculation then the EB1 SOFAD comes pretty close to 20K same as you are calculating maybe adding the factor for EB1 is then too drastic however I feel its just a way to normalize lower numbers. However we can all definitely agree on 1 thing that we will get at least 12K from EB1 this year.

Teddy,
Good, let's hope at least one of our approaches hold good for EB1 for FY 2011.

[gcwait2007]

Teddy,
Good, let's hope at least one of our approaches hold good for EB1 for FY 2011.

Veni & Teddy,

Thanks for making me to feel good :)

I have been praying to Almighty that there should be at least 20K spillover from EB1 to EB2 India.

[veni001]

Veni & Teddy,

Thanks for making me to feel good :)

I have been praying to Almighty that there should be at least 20K spillover from EB1 to EB2 India.

gcwait2007,
Almighty is listing to your prayers :) :) :)

[TeddyKoochu]

Summary Of Predictions
EB2 I- FEB To APR 2007 (20% Chance of 01-AUG-2007)

EB2 India Calculation Details

Date India China PWMB CP Total Cumulative
Offset 7200 800 0 0 8000 8000
May-06 1110 38 100 100 1348 9348
Jun-06 1696 541 100 100 2437 11785
Jul-06 1505 620 100 100 2325 14110
Aug-06 1677 693 100 100 2570 16680
Sep-06 1745 773 100 100 2718 19398
Oct-06 1747 732 100 100 2679 22077
Nov-06 1737 667 100 100 2604 24681
Dec-06 1881 770 200 100 2951 27632
Jan-07 1540 654 200 100 2494 30126
Feb-07 1444 615 200 100 2359 32485
Mar-07 1404 682 200 100 2386 34871
Apr-07 1420 609 200 100 2329 37200
May-07 1070 519 500 100 2189 39389
Jun-07 1272 558 1000 100 2930 42319
Jul-07 1673 1788 2000 100 5561 47880

- In the table above the columns India and china represent the monthly figures from the Jan 2011 Inventory. By this time we should assume that 3 months worth of cap for India and China has been consumed. So ~ 1400 Numbers are consumed.

- PD porting was calculated as 3K for last year by subtraction of the EB3-I inventory and then excluding the EB3-I annual cap, this year however due to the district office demand inclusion it is not possible. A very conservative guesstimate that will not be broken is 6K. PD Porting that may have happened in these months in 2011 should be reflected in the inventory (There are divergent opinions on this subject though if EB2 Inventory is updated as soon as porting happens). So to be safe we will assume that all of 6K porting that is expected has not been applied to the inventory.

- The starting offset for India assumes 6K PD Porting + 700 Cases Approved + 500 old cases not approved = 7200. For China it Assumes 700 Cases Approved + 100 older cases. The total offset at the start is 8000. We should assume the porting as part of the offset as we will not se any movement till Jul. Looks like porting is only happening for India.

- PWMB refers to those who could not file for their 485’s as the labor approval was missed out or they are adding dependants now. These values are by my gut feeling another point to note is that the PWMB demand especially from May 2007 maybe felt only when the dates reach that point, so ~3500 lesser SOFAD maybe required for the dates to actually move forward if the inventory is the baseline.

- The total monthly is the extrapolated total for the month and cumulative sum is the cumulative figure. Now if someone is interested in finding out that what point we will reach in Sep 2011 they should put their figure of SOFAD and see the resting point.

- Following is the SOFAD received from different sources based on the DOS Annual Report EB1 - 2K, EB2 ROW - 9.5K, EB5 - 9K, Regular Cap (I+C) = 6K

EB2 ROW Calculation from Trackitt

Whole of FY 2010 ROW EB2 + NIW + MEX + PHL - 513 + 63 + 5 + 34 = 615
Whole of FY 2009 ROW EB2 + NIW + MEX + PHL - 720 + 80 + 7 + 43 = 850

So 2010 ROW consumption should be (615/850) * (40-5.5) = 25K.
2010 ROW SOFAD = 43.5 - 25 - 6 = 12.5K

Actual 2010 SOFAD from EB2 ROW was 9.5K so we should have a effectiveness factor which is ~ 75%.

Now

7 Months of FY 2011 ROW EB2 + NIW + MEX + PHL - 273 + 32 + 2 + 27 = 334
7 Months of FY 2010 ROW EB2 + NIW + MEX + PHL - 310 + 41 + 3 + 21 = 375

Current Rate = 89%.

Now EB2 ROW SOFAD would be

EB2 ROW + M + P consumption 2010 = 43.5 -9.5 -6 = 28K.
EB2 ROW SOFAD this year = 40-5.5- (89/100 * 28) = 9.5K

Multiplying with the effectiveness factor of 75% this would be 7K.

EB1 Calculation from Trackitt

EB1-A + EB1-B + EB1-C
2009 - 98 + 191 + 267 = 556
2010 - 101 + 158 + 123 = 382

The Consumption for EB1 for 2009 and 2010 for EB1 was ~ 41K, in 2009 EB1 got spillover from EB5 of 1K whereas in 2010 the cap was higher and EB1 consumed 41K.

So effectiveness factor = 382 / 556 = 68%.

7 Months of FY 2010 - 74 + 123 + 89 = 286
7 Months of FY 2011 - 36 + 48 + 44 = 128

Now the projected consumption for EB1 is (128/286) * 41.5K ~ 18573.
However we should extrapolate this by the effectiveness factor 18573 * 100 / 68 = 27300.

This gives a projected fall down of 40K - 27.3K ~ 12.5K which is very similar to the 12K figure that has been in the news. If we do not apply the effectiveness factor to EB1 then will receive ~22K from EB1 this can actually help to bring us close to the 01-Aug-2007 mark, however to have a conservative calculatuion lets move forward with 12K.

Now EB5 I believe will remain fairly stable at 8K and the I/C regular cap will provide is with 5.5K as expected.

So the effective SOFAD expected this year is 7+ 12.5 + 8 = 5.5 = 33K.

If we extrapolate the 33K SOFAD onto the table above then the expected PD movement will be around 15th Feb 2007. There maybe some buffer around this date so the range will be between 01-FEB-2007 and 01-APR-2007. There is a 20% chance that the dates may move to 01-AUG 2007 in case EB1 provides some extra spillover i.e. if it is really 12K * 2 = 24K and we disregard PWMB cases Virtual demand which will appear only when the dates move to that point) otherwise crossing this mark looks difficult this year.

[TeddyKoochu]

gcwait2007,
Almighty is listing to your prayers :) :) :)

gcwait2007 and veni thanks. I just hope our prayers help our dreams come true this year or atleasrt bring us close enogh. The June bulletin if there is say another 2 months movement will really be a litmus test.

[ifaith]

Hi Teddy
If DOL has to be really conservative then what's the minimum they might want to move the dates in June Bulletin for EB2 India?

[TeddyKoochu]

I believe that DOS should move the dates atleast by a month.

[qesehmk]

Friends,

Our sources tell us that there will be "Significant" movemement in the bulletin and that it will come out today or latest by tomorrow.

Stay tuned ... my take is that it will be at least 6 months movement. Could be upto a year.

[veni001]

Friends,

Our sources tell us that there will be "Significant" movemement in the bulletin and that it will come out today or latest by tomorrow.

Stay tuned ... my take is that it will be at least 6 months movement. Could be upto a year.

Q,
Great News!

Which means DOS/USCIS will test the waters similar to what they did last year for FB2A.

[zenmaster]

Friends,

Our sources tell us that there will be "Significant" movemement in the bulletin and that it will come out today or latest by tomorrow.

Stay tuned ... my take is that it will be at least 6 months movement. Could be upto a year.

Movement for June bulletin means, this year we will see great advancement of dates...
My bet is that by september, cut-off will move somewhere into 2008, and then pull back to 2007 jun/jul in october. :)

Thanks Q... for the heart-beating news tip ;)
Good Luck to one and all !

[ifaith]

Friends,

Our sources tell us that there will be "Significant" movemement in the bulletin and that it will come out today or latest by tomorrow.

Stay tuned ... my take is that it will be at least 6 months movement. Could be upto a year.

Hey Q
Is it okie for you to elaborate on the source:), the news you gave is rally awesome but do you have faith in the validity of the source.

A

[nuvikas]

Don't worry. It will all be official within a few hours.

[shaumack]

Friends,

Our sources tell us that there will be "Significant" movemement in the bulletin and that it will come out today or latest by tomorrow.

Stay tuned ... my take is that it will be at least 6 months movement. Could be upto a year.

Q, That's a great news if it will happen. But I cant believe you could ever get sucked into such a rumor considering your conservative approach as far as I know after following you for last few months. This suggests that your source has to be VERY SOLID to convince you to make such a statement. I look forward to this movement. Let's see and Good Luck to all.

[qesehmk]

Guys

I wouldn't do it without trusting the source. The person talked directly to CO and gave this info.

I usually dont like to engage in rumours. But this is NOT a rumor. This came directly to me and I have every reason to believe the source. Now whether CO misled the source ... we will see !

[skpanda]

This is great news! All the best to everybody who will be greened this year!!

Any chance that DOS would make the dates current for EB2 for atleast 1 month before Sept 2011 and Retrogess in Oct 2011? I have a PD in 2010 and would really help me if I could file 485/EAD. I know this is too much to ask but then...i am hopeful...





Friends,

Our sources tell us that there will be "Significant" movemement in the bulletin and that it will come out today or latest by tomorrow.

Stay tuned ... my take is that it will be at least 6 months movement. Could be upto a year.

[leo07]

Friends,

Our sources tell us that there will be "Significant" movemement in the bulletin and that it will come out today or latest by tomorrow.

Stay tuned ... my take is that it will be at least 6 months movement. Could be upto a year.

Year will be a good movement for most of us here:)

[hsinghjkaur]

I thought that VB is few hours or a day later than the time when demand data for that month is released. I didn't see Demand Data yet so I doubt that VB will be today. My understanding is that it will be tomorrow but thanks for the news Q.

[anuran]

Friends,
Our sources tell us that there will be "Significant" movemement

Thanks Q.
Am I glad to be in the right forum / company at the right time !?!
Hope CO has no other aspirations...
-A
:)
PS: ALl the best to everyone who will benefit immediately from this movement.