EB3 Predictions & Calculations

[Spectator]

Can the 'AILA liaison' ask this question on EB3ROW/EB3I movement/spillover to DOS Visa office(r) /(Charlie Oppenheimer) ?AILA asked this question in mid March, with the following replies:


What will it take for there to be movement in EB-3 India?

At this time, there is nothing which can be done to improve the India EB-3 cut-off date situation unless there is a legislative change. The amount of pre-adjudicated India EB-3 demand versus the annual limit prevents more than a one or two week monthly movement of this cut-off date. For example, at this time, more than 9,100 India EB-3 applicants with priority dates earlier than January 1, 2005 (alone) have already been reported to the visa Office and the FY2015 annual limit is approximately 2,875.

Do you foresee EB-3 Worldwide becoming current anytime soon? If so, what would that mean for EB-3 India?

Charlie does not anticipate that EB-3 Worldwide will become current anytime soon but the cut-off date could easily reach 2015. If the Worldwide EB-3 category ever becomes current then (and only then) any "otherwise unused" numbers could be made available to the India EB-3 category, which has the earliest EB-3 cut-off date.

http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/threads/some-interesting-visa-office-updates.17812/

I don't think he is going to give any other answer if asked again.

[krishn]

What will it take for there to be movement in EB-3 India?

Do you foresee EB-3 Worldwide becoming current anytime soon? If so, what would that mean for EB-3 India?
more of sorta follow up questions on the ones above, like , since eb3row is technically current ,what is eb3row demand and if its low ,why not move eb3i aggressively like 3 weeks per bulletin in anticipation of fall across ?

[ROCK72]

more of sorta follow up questions on the ones above, like , since eb3row is technically current ,what is eb3row demand and if its low ,why not move eb3i aggressively like 3 weeks per bulletin in anticipation of fall across ?

Maybe it will. Someone in Trackitt with EB3I PD of 1/28/04 got RFE....

http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/1545445155/eb3-i-current-from-may-2015

[perestroika]

My first post here. Regret not joining sooner because I've always admired Q, Spectator, and others for their insightful analyses. I guess I should pop the cherry with a question. It seems like the AoS pre-registration fix will be implemented this year. If so, will the deluge of new I-485 applications slow down processing of EB3RoW I-485 processing, reduce approvable EB3RoW demand, and increase the FA base available to EB3I?

[Spectator]

My first post here. Regret not joining sooner because I've always admired Q, Spectator, and others for their insightful analyses. I guess I should pop the cherry with a question. It seems like the AoS pre-registration fix will be implemented this year. If so, will the deluge of new I-485 applications slow down processing of EB3RoW I-485 processing, reduce approvable EB3RoW demand, and increase the FA base available to EB3I?perestroika,

I think it would slow all processing, period, unless extra staff are hired. A slowing of EB3-ROW processing would likely equally mean less EB3-I would be processed as well.

It may well be that extra contractors could entirely process the preregistration cases, since they won't require adjudication. In which case, approval of cases that are current would be much less affected. There wouldn't be a pressing need to process the preregistration cases all at once within especially tight time frames. If it takes a year or more it probably isn't a particularly big deal.

It's an interesting question - I don't know the answer - just throwing out some thoughts.

You mentioned preregistration. If visa recapture were to happen, I could see processing times escalating to years, particularly if the Cut Off Dates were just made Current for all Categories.

[perestroika]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

My fear is that AoS pre-registration and EAD processing for new AoS applicants will screw up and effectively nullify any FA hopes EB3I has this year, even if USCIS hires extra contractors, because their onboarding and training will be at the hands of the existing staff. On the other hand, I suppose EB3I has a small advantage in that most of its demand is pre-approved, while the same cannot be said of EB3RoW. It's going to be one heck of a ride moving forward. AoS pre-registration fix, if it does happen, will significantly and permanently alter the visa bulletin dynamics.

[krishn]

Maybe it will. Someone in Trackitt with EB3I PD of 1/28/04 got RFE....

http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/1545445155/eb3-i-current-from-may-2015

Guru's,

If there is no FA till what date will EB3I move this FY? Are Feb2004 and Mar2004 EB3-I guys getting rfe's ?

Thanks

[krishn]

Guru's,

If there is no FA till what date will EB3I move this FY? Are Feb2004 and Mar2004 EB3-I guys getting rfe's ?

Thanks

looking at the i485 pending inventory from oct14, my guess is eb3i should move to march first week or april first week with no FA , depending on the still to be filed or already ported i485 counting errors!!


Are Feb2004 and Mar2004 EB3-I PD'ers getting rfe's ?

[amulchandra]

looking at the i485 pending inventory from oct14, my guess is eb3i should move to march first week or april first week with no FA , depending on the still to be filed or already ported i485 counting errors!!


Are Feb2004 and Mar2004 EB3-I PD'ers getting rfe's ?

I know one person at work place who got RFE with a March 2004 PD. I saw some one from April on trackitt.

[krishn]

I know one person at work place who got RFE with a March 2004 PD. I saw some one from April on trackitt.

thanks, is the rfe for EVL and medicals ?

Any FEB 2004 EB3I PD'ers getting RFE's ?

Thanks

[amulchandra]

Hi Spec,

I remember reading your post where you mentioned that Philippines may use the EB3 Row SO due to low demand in FB category. But looks like FB has enough demand that they had to retrogress dates. Do you think EB3 I will be the only candidate for EB3 ROW SO this year? Of course provided there is SO and all other applicable conditions stay the same.

Thanks
Amul

[Suva2001]

Hi Spec,

I remember reading your post where you mentioned that Philippines may use the EB3 Row SO due to low demand in FB category. But looks like FB has enough demand that they had to retrogress dates. Do you think EB3 I will be the only candidate for EB3 ROW SO this year? Of course provided there is SO and all other applicable conditions stay the same.

Thanks
Amul

I have the same question.

[Spectator]

Hi Spec,

I remember reading your post where you mentioned that Philippines may use the EB3 Row SO due to low demand in FB category. But looks like FB has enough demand that they had to retrogress dates. Do you think EB3 I will be the only candidate for EB3 ROW SO this year? Of course provided there is SO and all other applicable conditions stay the same.

Thanks
AmulAmul,

I did not say that Philippines would have low demand in FB. Philippines always use their FB allocation.

It's not technically correct to refer to EB3 Philippines as using ROW spillover.

Philippines are using visas within the overall 7% limit across FB and EB. Since they use their allocation for FB,it can be simplified to use of the 7% within EB.

Currently, the estimate of available EB visas for FY2015 (http://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/Statistics/Immigrant-Statistics/Web_Annual_Numerical_Limits.pdf) is 144,730.

7% of that represents 10,131 visas available to Philippines in EB categories. Use of less than that number (however many might be in a specific Category such as EB3) is not a violation of the 7% limit.

In FY2014, Philippines used 8,172 visas within EB, of which 5,685 were in EB3, when the 7% limit within EB was 10,517.

Since EB3 as a whole has a fixed limit, the ability of Philippines to use more than the prorated 7% amount in EB3 reduces the number available to ROW, but that cannot be described as FA from ROW to Philippines. The same is also true of Mexico, but has not been much of an issue since they started to share the same COD as ROW in FY2011.

For FY2015, Philippines might use something like the following in the other Categories (historical use plus allowing a higher number for EB2 this FY):

EB1 ----- 250
EB2 --- 3,000
EB4 ----- 250
EB5 ------- 5

Total - 3,505

That theoretically leaves 6,626 that Philippines could use in EB3 and stay within the 7% limit.

A large part of EB-P use is by RN and PT who Consular Process in Manila. The rapid movement of the COD has increased the numbers of qualified applicants and many older cases have probably now re-qualified with new employers (having originally lost their sponsor). This has led to a surge of demand from EB3-P and necessitated retrogression. The NVC figures have always shown a huge number of CP cases (over 29k in Nov 2014). It's been a matter of speculation as to how many might be "dead" or "abandoned" cases.

EB3-Mexico have previously seen a similar situation. In FY2008 they were Unavailable for the final quarter and in both FY2009 and FY2010 they were made Unavailable from May to September, having used 5,325, 4,566 and 7,740 visas respectively.

India will be the only candidate for Fall Across from ROW within EB3. India applicants have the earliest PD and it's unlikely there will be sufficient FA to India in FY2015 will cause them to reach even the COD of 01JAN05 set for Philippines in the June VB. If they do, then both Countries will start to share FA.

[perestroika]

India will be the only candidate for Fall Across from ROW within EB3. India applicants have the earliest PD and it's unlikely there will be sufficient FA to India in FY2015 will cause them to reach even the COD of 01JAN05 set for Philippines in the June VB. If they do, then both Countries will start to share FA.
Given all that we know today (PERM stats, EB3:EB2 ratio, January inventory, I-485 processing times, VB movement thus far, EB3P consumption), how much FA do you think EB3I will get from EB3RoW, and how far will the EB3I COD move in FY2015, in your view?

[amulchandra]

Amul,

I did not say that Philippines would have low demand in FB. Philippines always use their FB allocation.

It's not technically correct to refer to EB3 Philippines as using ROW spillover.

Philippines are using visas within the overall 7% limit across FB and EB. Since they use their allocation for FB,it can be simplified to use of the 7% within EB.

Currently, the estimate of available EB visas for FY2015 (http://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/Statistics/Immigrant-Statistics/Web_Annual_Numerical_Limits.pdf) is 144,730.

7% of that represents 10,131 visas available to Philippines in EB categories. Use of less than that number (however many might be in a specific Category such as EB3) is not a violation of the 7% limit.

In FY2014, Philippines used 8,172 visas within EB, of which 5,685 were in EB3, when the 7% limit within EB was 10,517.

Since EB3 as a whole has a fixed limit, the ability of Philippines to use more than the prorated 7% amount in EB3 reduces the number available to ROW, but that cannot be described as FA from ROW to Philippines. The same is also true of Mexico, but has not been much of an issue since they started to share the same COD as ROW in FY2011.

For FY2015, Philippines might use something like the following in the other Categories (historical use plus allowing a higher number for EB2 this FY):

EB1 ----- 250
EB2 --- 3,000
EB4 ----- 250
EB5 ------- 5

Total - 3,505

That theoretically leaves 6,626 that Philippines could use in EB3 and stay within the 7% limit.

A large part of EB-P use is by RN and PT who Consular Process in Manila. The rapid movement of the COD has increased the numbers of qualified applicants and many older cases have probably now re-qualified with new employers (having originally lost their sponsor). This has led to a surge of demand from EB3-P and necessitated retrogression. The NVC figures have always shown a huge number of CP cases (over 29k in Nov 2014). It's been a matter of speculation as to how many might be "dead" or "abandoned" cases.

EB3-Mexico have previously seen a similar situation. In FY2008 they were Unavailable for the final quarter and in both FY2009 and FY2010 they were made Unavailable from May to September, having used 5,325, 4,566 and 7,740 visas respectively.

India will be the only candidate for Fall Across from ROW within EB3. India applicants have the earliest PD and it's unlikely there will be sufficient FA to India in FY2015 will cause them to reach even the COD of 01JAN05 set for Philippines in the June VB. If they do, then both Countries will start to share FA.

Thanks a lot for your detail explanation Spec.

Amul

[Suva2001]

Spec, I was not aware of this. Thanks for explaining this. That means that there is a possiblity that EB3Row quota might have already reduced to such an extent that EB3Row has already reached the limit. In that case EB3-I might not receive any FA visas. Can this be a possibility?

[krishn]

I know one person at work place who got RFE with a March 2004 PD. I saw some one from April on trackitt.

Looks like all of the EVL , Medical RFE's for EB3I for FEB04 and Mar04 are from NSC. Any TSC rfe's for feb/mar/apr04 EB3I's?

[Spectator]

Spec, I was not aware of this. Thanks for explaining this. That means that there is a possiblity that EB3Row quota might have already reduced to such an extent that EB3Row has already reached the limit. In that case EB3-I might not receive any FA visas. Can this be a possibility?I think that seems unlikely based on the information that is available.

Even if EB3-P used 6.5k and Mexico, China and India used the 3 k allocation, that is only 15.5k.

The allocation for EB3 is 41.4k, so ROW would have to reach 25.9k for there to be no FA.

Even though I do expect EB3-ROW approvals to increase, I don't see them reaching that figure. I wouldn't want to say exactly how many ROW might use, but I do still expect FA to India within EB3.

[jdoe99]

Given that EB2 is not expected to get a much spillover as the last few years, could it be that's why they are aggressively moving EB2 before the last quarter. CO has also mentioned that the dates will move slowly in the last coupla months for EB2. So I am wondering if they are giving out EB2's evenly till then and the last couple of months would be EB3 blitz time. Could it be that DOS and USCIS has already started working more closely as WH wanted?

[amulchandra]

Bumping this thread up in light of the RFEs EB3 I receiving. Any guesses as to what would be the PD movements in the next VB?

Thanks
Amul

[Suva2001]

Bumping this thread up in light of the RFEs EB3 I receiving. Any guesses as to what would be the PD movements in the next VB?

Thanks
Amul

Same question from me.

[Suva2001]

Same question from me.

We are tracking RFEs received by EB3-I people with PDs up to Dec, 2004 in the document below. Any idea on how much movement we can expect in Sep visa bulletin for EB3-I by looking at the document.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kQh4DP77LHkasgWH-EbHt-lpm7cWgASaRYQaDKoFX0Y/edit?pli=1#gid=0

Thanks
Suva

[krishn]

24Mar2k4 PD here, with TSC, got rfe updt on 7/8.

[amulchandra]

Thanks for the heads up.

Also of note is that EB3 China retrogressed over 7 years from 01SEP11 to 01JUN04 (the same as EB3-India and EB3 Philippines(who were Unavailable in July)):



EB3-ROW and EB3 Mexico advance 3.5 months to 15JUL15.

EB2 China advanced 2.5 months to 15DEC13.

YT and Spec,

Can you please express your thoughts on EB3 I movement? TSC and NSC are issuing RFEs to PDs until Dec 2004. Do you think it will move to at least Dec 2004 in the next bulletin?

After a long time EB3 I is seeing a ray of sun shine. Hope good days are ahead.

[CleanSock]

Spec, does this mean that whatever FA EB3 India is going to get in the last quarter will be shared by other countries too since all of them are retrogressed equally?



Thanks for the heads up.

Also of note is that EB3 China retrogressed over 7 years from 01SEP11 to 01JUN04 (the same as EB3-India and EB3 Philippines(who were Unavailable in July)):



EB3-ROW and EB3 Mexico advance 3.5 months to 15JUL15.

EB2 China advanced 2.5 months to 15DEC13.

[CleanSock]

Also what is this date for EB3 ROW...15th July 2015. Is this a joke? Today is 10th July. Why not make it current?

[amulchandra]

Spec, does this mean that whatever FA EB3 India is going to get in the last quarter will be shared by other countries too since all of them are retrogressed equally?

Theoretically yes IF they have pending applications with such an old PD which I highly doubt.

[axecapone]

Is anyone surprised that EB3 China has retrogressed massively? Does that bode bad news to EB2/EB3 India?

[sstest]

Is anyone surprised that EB3 China has retrogressed massively? Does that bode bad news to EB2/EB3 India?

(I think) Any retrogression is generally meant to to hold the numbers within the statutory limits. EB3I is the category with densest, oldest set of PDs in EB3 so almost all of the spillover should continue to go to that.

[Suva2001]

Also what is this date for EB3 ROW...15th July 2015. Is this a joke? Today is 10th July. Why not make it current?

This bulletin would be effective from Aug 1. That's why July 15.

[Suva2001]

Theoretically yes IF they have pending applications with such an old PD which I highly doubt.

No countries other than India have older PD before 2010 in EB3. So 100% SO should go to EB3-India.

[GC2000]

Any predictions for EB3-I September VB?

[amulchandra]

I have a question about quarterly SO. From the Visa modernization report that was published in July, it seems from October VB onwards DHS might apply quarterly SO. The following is the verbiage from the report.

Recommendation 2:
Refine monthly allocation of visas.
State will increase monthly visa allocation totals during the first three quarters of the fiscal year to the degree permitted by law in order to ensure that fewer numbers are left for the final quarter, thereby ensuring that visa numbers issued are as closely aligned with statutory mandates as possible.

I am wondering, if this is really implemented what would be the movement for EB3 I in the next two quarters.
The following is the link to the PDF.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/final_visa_modernization_report1.pdf

[amulchandra]

To YTeleven,

Looks like your predictions for EB3 I are coming true. EB3 I jumped to DEC 22 2004. A huge leap.

Can you please provide your opinion on how it is going to be in FY 2016. My PD is July 22 2006. Do you think I stand a chance in 2016?

Thanks a lot
Amul

[YTeleven]

To YTeleven,

Looks like your predictions for EB3 I are coming true. EB3 I jumped to DEC 22 2004. A huge leap.

Can you please provide your opinion on how it is going to be in FY 2016. My PD is July 22 2006. Do you think I stand a chance in 2016?

Thanks a lot
Amul


Amul,

This chart (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B89CvsiXVO92NE5OT2lnaGdrSmM) was created approx. an year ago and now we are seeing that the current trend of EB3-I is similar to what we predicted in the chart.
I still do believe that in FY16, 50% of EB-3 quota will go to EB3-I, clearing all the existing EB3-I backlogs and triggering the inventory build up and no more EB3 to EB2 upgrades and EB2-I people will start realizing the option of downgrading to EB3-I.
please see my previous post on what we can expect in next 18 months. I'm still sticking to what I said except few deviations.

Will wait and see. I'm pretty much sure you should be current by this time next year.

[amulchandra]

Amul,

This chart (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B89CvsiXVO92NE5OT2lnaGdrSmM) was created approx. an year ago and now we are seeing that the current trend of EB3-I is similar to what we predicted in the chart.
I still do believe that in FY16, 50% of EB-3 quota will go to EB3-I, clearing all the existing EB3-I backlogs and triggering the inventory build up and no more EB3 to EB2 upgrades and EB2-I people will start realizing the option of downgrading to EB3-I.
please see my previous post on what we can expect in next 18 months. I'm still sticking to what I said except few deviations.

Will wait and see. I'm pretty much sure you should be current by this time next year.

Thank you very much for your reply YTEleven . Hope your words come true. I am anxiously waiting for the end of this long journey.

[HarepathekaIntezar]

Amul,

This chart (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B89CvsiXVO92NE5OT2lnaGdrSmM) was created approx. an year ago and now we are seeing that the current trend of EB3-I is similar to what we predicted in the chart.
I still do believe that in FY16, 50% of EB-3 quota will go to EB3-I, clearing all the existing EB3-I backlogs and triggering the inventory build up and no more EB3 to EB2 upgrades and EB2-I people will start realizing the option of downgrading to EB3-I.
please see my previous post on what we can expect in next 18 months. I'm still sticking to what I said except few deviations.

Will wait and see. I'm pretty much sure you should be current by this time next year.

Nice chart and I believe it is most accurate prediction so far. How come you have not projected the EB3-ROW line through FY2015/FY2016 like you have done for EB3I?

[mechanical13]

Nice chart and I believe it is most accurate prediction so far. How come you have not projected the EB3-ROW line through FY2015/FY2016 like you have done for EB3I?

YTEleven, great work on the predictions. Do you have a similar prediction for EB2-I? Seems like it is on track to become the new EB3-I. Would be nice to see some positive information on that front (if any)

[anuprab]

Thank you very much for your reply YTEleven . Hope your words come true. I am anxiously waiting for the end of this long journey.

Based on all the discussions and the fantastic chart by YTEleven, what is the probability that June 2006 PD EB3 India will get greened in FY 2016? Thanks experts for all your hard work in crunching the data!

[qesehmk]

Guys - I just noticed that EB3-I retrogressed from Dec 2004 to Mar 2004 in Oct bulletin.

I just wanted to say that it indicates incredible incompetence or insensitivity or both on part of DoS.

EB3-I is the worst affected category in EB immigration. It doesn't get worse than this because they are most retrogressed and they will consume every single visa you through at them. So one would expect complete predictability in EB3 category. DoS shouldn't have to move those dates ahead and retro them because 100% of those cases should be preadjudicated. So the only uncertainty should be in cases that people have abandoned. But for reasons best knows to DoS they chose to move the dates far and then retro.

They could simply have adjusted the dates right at the last month and held their because they knew exactly the unused number of visas at the end of August. But no - that's not what they would do. I am amazed to say the least.

[Suva2001]

Guys - I just noticed that EB3-I retrogressed from Dec 2004 to Mar 2004 in Oct bulletin.

I just wanted to say that it indicates incredible incompetence or insensitivity or both on part of DoS.

EB3-I is the worst affected category in EB immigration. It doesn't get worse than this because they are most retrogressed and they will consume every single visa you through at them. So one would expect complete predictability in EB3 category. DoS shouldn't have to move those dates ahead and retro them because 100% of those cases should be preadjudicated. So the only uncertainty should be in cases that people have abandoned. But for reasons best knows to DoS they chose to move the dates far and then retro.

They could simply have adjusted the dates right at the last month and held their because they knew exactly the unused number of visas at the end of August. But no - that's not what they would do. I am amazed to say the least.

I think it's a stop gap measure on USCIS side. There were lot of approvals with PDs till Dec 22, 2004. If you check the tracker below more than 50% people got approved. Also I am pretty sure there are many got approved too in the other 50%. Just that those users hasn't reported in "t r a c i t t" yet. So after Sep 30 there shouldn't be more than 3000-4000 people left in 2004. That means they have to move the date forward at certain point of time, may be from Dec, 2015.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kQh4DP77LHkasgWH-EbHt-lpm7cWgASaRYQaDKoFX0Y/edit?pli=1#gid=577133620

Thanks

[HarepathekaIntezar]

Guys - I just noticed that EB3-I retrogressed from Dec 2004 to Mar 2004 in Oct bulletin.

I just wanted to say that it indicates incredible incompetence or insensitivity or both on part of DoS.

EB3-I is the worst affected category in EB immigration. It doesn't get worse than this because they are most retrogressed and they will consume every single visa you through at them. So one would expect complete predictability in EB3 category. DoS shouldn't have to move those dates ahead and retro them because 100% of those cases should be preadjudicated. So the only uncertainty should be in cases that people have abandoned. But for reasons best knows to DoS they chose to move the dates far and then retro.

They could simply have adjusted the dates right at the last month and held their because they knew exactly the unused number of visas at the end of August. But no - that's not what they would do. I am amazed to say the least.

I think this 'Dates for Filing Applications' has messed up everything. USCIS initially screwed up the EB dates for China, India and Philippines and FB Dates for Mexico. Then they tried to correct it with their revised Oct VB. The concept is sound however - They want to invite such Applicants to file for their AOS that they think will be processed to 'Final Action' in the next 12 months. DOS and USCIS have never been known to be Mathematically or logically sound. Here is a post from trackitt that I agree with. It does seem conservative compared to YTeleven chart. The user is predicting EB3I.

Here are my calculations of how it will work in FY-2016. Let us start with October.

Total EB3 Visas = 3126

Definitely used up due to pending inventory:
India = 233
Phillipines = 233
China = 233
Mexico = 233

Total for Row = 2192

If USCIS is unable to utilize any of these 2192 visa by October 8th, they will be transferred to the oldest pending Applicants, a lions share of whom happen to be from India, and the November VB Dates will reflect this Spillover.

The most valid of speculations is how many of these 2192 Visas will be used up by ROW. Even though July Inventory total is 11K pending ROW Applicants, logically the fact that Approvals were being handed out till the last day of the FY to India Applicants would suggest that the ROW Inventory of Eligible Applicants had been cleared and only after that the balance was transferred to India. The only ones that are in the Inventory would be those who are waiting for name checks and other RFE responses.

I expect to see a ROW Inventory of around 3K in October Inventory. But again like I mentioned, quite a few of them would be waiting for name checks and RFE responses and so I expect about 500 - 600 visas to spillover to India. That would result in November VB PD moving forward to June 2004.

Given the pipeline of new AOS filers for EB3 in general has been declining dramatically (based on published reports of I-140 Approvals), as they too seem to have caught on to the fact that EB2 que had been moving a lot faster. I expect 800-1000 new ROW filers every month. That would leave us with unused ROW visas of 800-1000 every month.

We also have approximately 150 Porters a month vacating their seats in EB3 que and grabbing EB2 Visas.

I expect the VB movement to be something like this:

Nov 15 VB - June 2004
Dec 15 VB - Sep 2004
Jan 16 VB - Nov 2004
Feb 16 VB - Jan 2005
Mar 16 VB - Mar 2005
Apr 16 VB - Mar 2005
May16 VB - Mar 2005
Jun 16 VB - Sep 2005
July 16 VB - Dec 2005
Aug 16 VB - Feb 2006
Sep 16 Vb - Apr 2006

[amulchandra]

Hi YTEleven,

I am wondering if there are any changes in your projection for EB3I for FY 2016. Can you please share your thoughts?

Thank you very much
Amul

[HarepathekaIntezar]

I don't see anything that would alter @YTEleven's projection. The ROW demand in FY2016 still seems to be as weak or weaker than in FY2015. Just a matter of waiting for April VB to start the SO for FY2016.

[EB3Iwaiting]

EB3ROW after being technically current for the last few VBs have now slightly fallen behind. Though 1st Oct would still be technically current considering the time taken for PERM processing. CO in his meeting with AILA last month had said that he will move EB3ROW to 15th Oct. But EB3ROW still remains at 1st Oct. Is there new demand in EB3ROW or CO is just being too conservative and not moving the dates? If the pending inventory report comes out this week, it will shed new light on EB3ROW demand.

But is there any reason why CO is not moving EB3ROW dates? Should we worry that this will result in less SO to EB3I?

[HarepathekaIntezar]

EB3ROW after being technically current for the last few VBs have now slightly fallen behind. Though 1st Oct would still be technically current considering the time taken for PERM processing. CO in his meeting with AILA last month had said that he will move EB3ROW to 15th Oct. But EB3ROW still remains at 1st Oct. Is there new demand in EB3ROW or CO is just being too conservative and not moving the dates? If the pending inventory report comes out this week, it will shed new light on EB3ROW demand.

But is there any reason why CO is not moving EB3ROW dates? Should we worry that this will result in less SO to EB3I?

I am beginning to NOT believe everything that CO says. He can't get DOS to configure the CP Pending Inventory in the same format as USCIS does and neither can he release it in time like USCIS does. He seems to be a big BS'er.

[mechanical13]

I am beginning to NOT believe everything that CO says. He can't get DOS to configure the CP Pending Inventory in the same format as USCIS does and neither can he release it in time like USCIS does. He seems to be a big BS'er.

You know, CO actually reads this forum... comments like yours are going to hurt his feelings.

[qesehmk]

If CO is reading this - instead of feeling hurt for himself he should feel the hurt of the backlogged candidates. He should learn their state of affairs and push through transparency and administrative reforms as much as he can.

To be honest - DoS works 10 times better than DHS. So some credit is due to CO.


You know, CO actually reads this forum... comments like yours are going to hurt his feelings.

[EB3Iwaiting]

If CO is reading this - instead of feeling hurt for himself he should feel the hurt of the backlogged candidates. He should learn their state of affairs and push through transparency and administrative reforms as much as he can.

To be honest - DoS works 10 times better than DHS. So some credit is due to CO.

Q, Is it possible that EB3ROW has new demand? Maybe old PDs deciding to file now? Either way, that may not be good news for EB3I as they will get less SOs. EB3I being the most retrogressed category badly needs all the visas it can get. I hope the pending inventory is released this week and will give us a better idea. What are your thoughts?

[qesehmk]

Yes EB3Iwaiting - there always is new demand. Plus there is unprocessed demand from last year. The question is how much would both be? To answer that we need to know the consumption during 2015. Those reports are not out yet.
Q, Is it possible that EB3ROW has new demand? Maybe old PDs deciding to file now? Either way, that may not be good news for EB3I as they will get less SOs. EB3I being the most retrogressed category badly needs all the visas it can get. I hope the pending inventory is released this week and will give us a better idea. What are your thoughts?

[EB3Iwaiting]

Yes EB3Iwaiting - there always is new demand. Plus there is unprocessed demand from last year. The question is how much would both be? To answer that we need to know the consumption during 2015. Those reports are not out yet.
It is really sadistic to not release the reports yet. Is it intentional since the visagate lawsuit is going on?

[qesehmk]

It is really sadistic to not release the reports yet. Is it intentional since the visagate lawsuit is going on?
It is very insensitive to say the least. Somehow i have a feeling that some visas were wasted in 2015. Lets see if my feelings are validated.

[EB3Iwaiting]

It is very insensitive to say the least. Somehow i have a feeling that some visas were wasted in 2015. Lets see if my feelings are validated.

So, you think USCIS wasted visas last year? I specifically remember getting an email from USCIS where they said they have stopped processing all I-485s as they have run out of visas.

[qesehmk]

So, you think USCIS wasted visas last year? I specifically remember getting an email from USCIS where they said they have stopped processing all I-485s as they have run out of visas.
Check out the 485 approvals under 485 performance data for 2015 on DHS website and then add the CP approvals from DoS site. Those two add up slightly less than 140K. My memory (and I may be wrong) is that during 2015 143K visas were available. Check and let me know what you think.

[mechanical13]

So, you think USCIS wasted visas last year? I specifically remember getting an email from USCIS where they said they have stopped processing all I-485s as they have run out of visas.

It's such a shame that USCIS is as inefficient as it seems to be. Why hasn't anyone proposed a process efficiency/restructuring initiative at USCIS? Fire 80% of the workforce, outsource the technology deployments, and streamline processes to make it a lean machine.

[Spectator]

Check out the 485 approvals under 485 performance data for 2015 on DHS website and then add the CP approvals from DoS site. Those two add up slightly less than 140K. My memory (and I may be wrong) is that during 2015 143K visas were available. Check and let me know what you think.Q,

I'd caution about doing that.

USCIS figures are s**t and mixing and matching those figures with DOS ones may give a figure that is not very accurate.

A case in point, using FY2014 figures as you propose:

AOS approvals from the USCIS All Forms Data for FY2014 was 126,939.
CP cases from Table VI of the DOS Visa Statistics was 21,365.

That gives a total of 148,304 which is well below the 150,241 EB allocation for FY2014.

The only problem is that Table V of the DOS report shows 151,359 total approvals for FY2014 - actually more than the allocation.

The DOS figure for AOS approvals was 129,994 - a difference of 3,055.

The FY2015 mixed calculation gives 117,416 AOS approvals (from USCIS) plus 21,613 CP approvals (from DOS). That's a total of 139,029 against the published allocation of 144,796 (a difference of 5,767).

While that is large, its not entirely beyond USCIS capability to have made that sort of error.

I can't deny that there may well be a small shortfall this FY given the gap, but let's at least acknowledge that in FY2013 and FY2014, more EB visas were issued than the official allocation (3,921 in total).

[vyruss]

Q,

I can't deny that there may well be a small shortfall this FY given the gap, but let's at least acknowledge that in FY2013 and FY2014, more EB visas were issued than the official allocation (3,921 in total).

Trust your number crunching there Spec. But isn't USCIS breaking the law if they issue more than what they are supposed to any fiscal year? If they are not breaking the law then why not recapture some of the visas they have wasted in the past. I keep on hearing that they would need some kind of legislation for that. Or is USCIS merely stating that they try to adhere to the visa limits in good faith and occasionally it is possible to go over/under.

[qesehmk]

Thanks Spec. I agree and appreciate your thoughts.

Lets wait for the final data from DoS then!
Q,

I'd caution about doing that.

USCIS figures are s**t and mixing and matching those figures with DOS ones may give a figure that is not very accurate.

A case in point, using FY2014 figures as you propose:

AOS approvals from the USCIS All Forms Data for FY2014 was 126,939.
CP cases from Table VI of the DOS Visa Statistics was 21,365.

That gives a total of 148,304 which is well below the 150,241 EB allocation for FY2014.

The only problem is that Table V of the DOS report shows 151,359 total approvals for FY2014 - actually more than the allocation.

The DOS figure for AOS approvals was 129,994 - a difference of 3,055.

The FY2015 mixed calculation gives 117,416 AOS approvals (from USCIS) plus 21,613 CP approvals (from DOS). That's a total of 139,029 against the published allocation of 144,796 (a difference of 5,767).

While that is large, its not entirely beyond USCIS capability to have made that sort of error.

I can't deny that there may well be a small shortfall this FY given the gap, but let's at least acknowledge that in FY2013 and FY2014, more EB visas were issued than the official allocation (3,921 in total).

[HarepathekaIntezar]

To be honest - DoS works 10 times better than DHS. So some credit is due to CO.

I am wondering how difficult or expensive it must be to Rig up a report. Maybe it will also cost DOS $1 Billion, like it did for USCIS? If DoS is 10 times better than DHS, then how come they cannot publish their Reports on time and in a clear format?

[qesehmk]

I am wondering how difficult or expensive it must be to Rig up a report. Maybe it will also cost DOS $1 Billion, like it did for USCIS? If DoS is 10 times better than DHS, then how come they cannot publish their Reports on time and in a clear format?

DoS has published a lot of 2015 data. DHS hasn't even published 2014 annual report! That's the difference unfortunately.

But I hear you. I don't understand why DoS has to wait for DHS to publish something. They should know how many visas they granted by country category.

[anuprab]

[QUOTE=qesehmk;57162]DoS has published a lot of 2015 data. DHS hasn't even published 2014 annual report! That's the difference unfortunately.

But I hear you. I don't understand why DoS has to wait for DHS to publish something. They should know how many visas they granted by country category.[/QUOTE

I know EB3 india is expected to move nicely this year mainly from spillover from EB3RoW. what is the risk that EB3RoW filings increase suddenly and jeopardize any movement, are we back to the 2-3 weeks movement again in this most unlucky category then ??

[qesehmk]

I know EB3 india is expected to move nicely this year mainly from spillover from EB3RoW. what is the risk that EB3RoW filings increase suddenly and jeopardize any movement, are we back to the 2-3 weeks movement again in this most unlucky category then ??
That risk is moderate or low. But the risk of EB3-P NVC applications is moderate or high. EB3-P CP demand is a dark horse and we dont know their time distribution.

[qesehmk]

Finally, this is the first time CO has semi-officially acknowledged that the estimated Filing Dates may not be reached. That is newsworthy and significant. Until now, it has only been people like those on this forum who have drawn that conclusion.
On a serious note - I am reasonably sure that the EB3-I FAD are too conservative. And as you observed earlier CO kept mum on potential SOFAD from EB3-ROW.

[Spectator]

On a serious note - I am reasonably sure that the EB3-I FAD are too conservative. And as you observed earlier CO kept mum on potential SOFAD from EB3-ROW.
Q,

Yes, I'm quite mystified by CO's approach to EB3.

I know I can be conservative (annoyingly so to some people at times), but come on!

CO could make fairly major movements already without taking any risks at all.

Realistically, there's limits to how high the other EB3 Countries can go and an absolute minimum number of extra visas that will become available to EB3-I.

[EB3Iwaiting]

Q,

Yes, I'm quite mystified by CO's approach to EB3.

I know I can be conservative (annoyingly so to some people at times), but come on!

CO could make fairly major movements already without taking any risks at all.

Realistically, there's limits to how high the other EB3 Countries can go and an absolute minimum number of extra visas that will become available to EB3-I.

Couldn't have said it better Spec. Regarding "I know I can be conservative (annoyingly so to some people at times)", I know I have been too. What CO is doing with EB3 is a mystery. Ironically, he did not even mention anything about ROWs at all. I noticed another thing in his statement and that is what HE DID NOT SAY. Remember in the last few months, he kept saying that "rapid movement of EB3ROW cutoff dates will generate demand and it will need to be adjusted (retrogressed) accordingly. So far that has not happened, hopefully he has given up on that. Even if there is an increase in PERM certifications, the demand is not enough to retrogress the dates.

I believe whatever he will do will happen in the final 3 months. USCIS may be resistant to do any extra work before the last quarter and their relationship has only gone worse after the Oct VB debacle and the lawsuit. This will lead to visa wastage in the end and after the misallocation last year, EB3Is just cannot catch a break.

I agree that the Filing dates will only move once the pending inventory is low enough to generate demand and that will happen for EB3I before EB2I. The Filing Date for EB2I seems too optimistic now and the Filing date for EB3I is too pessimistic.

[anuprab]

Couldn't have said it better Spec. Regarding "I know I can be conservative (annoyingly so to some people at times)", I know I have been too. What CO is doing with EB3 is a mystery. Ironically, he did not even mention anything about ROWs at all. I noticed another thing in his statement and that is what HE DID NOT SAY. Remember in the last few months, he kept saying that "rapid movement of EB3ROW cutoff dates will generate demand and it will need to be adjusted (retrogressed) accordingly. So far that has not happened, hopefully he has given up on that. Even if there is an increase in PERM certifications, the demand is not enough to retrogress the dates.

I believe whatever he will do will happen in the final 3 months. USCIS may be resistant to do any extra work before the last quarter and their relationship has only gone worse after the Oct VB debacle and the lawsuit. This will lead to visa wastage in the end and after the misallocation last year, EB3Is just cannot catch a break.

I agree that the Filing dates will only move once the pending inventory is low enough to generate demand and that will happen for EB3I before EB2I. The Filing Date for EB2I seems too optimistic now and the Filing date for EB3I is too pessimistic.

and i know what is going to happen..over alloction to EB2 and underallocation to EB3

[EB3Iwaiting]

and i know what is going to happen..over alloction to EB2 and underallocation to EB3
Probably not overallocation to EB2 looking at how cautiously he is moving EB2I dates. This time it can be simple wastage in EB3 category. Either way, EB3Is will lose.

[Spectator]

I agree that the Filing dates will only move once the pending inventory is low enough to generate demand and that will happen for EB3I before EB2I. The Filing Date for EB2I seems too optimistic now and the Filing date for EB3I is too pessimistic.EB3Iwaiting,

That might give rise to a very interesting situation.

As you have said, it's quite possible that the EB3-I backlog will be exhausted before the EB2-I one is.

It's my understanding that USCIS only have the choice to accept ALL the EB Filing Dates, or none at all. That is, in such a situation USCIS could not allow a Filing Date for EB3-I alone.

That seems to leave two choices:

a) USCIS allow all EB Filing Dates for a short period when such a situation occurs, with CO moving the EB3-I date fairly considerably at that point to collect a new Inventory beyond July 2007. All other EB Categories would potentially benefit as well. However, if CO was too aggressive, USCIS might simply not accept the Filing Date for EB3-I and therefore all EB Filing Dates.

b) USCIS won't accept EB Filing Dates and CO is forced to move the Final Action Date for EB3-I forward considerably to collect Inventory. USCIS would have no say in whether to accept new applications or not. The Final Action Date would eventially retrogress significantly as sufficient new applications were processed to completion.

I'm not sure which scenario I would bet on. USCIS have shown an unwillingness to use the Filing Dates so far. If (b) happens, then it would be no different than when Filing Dates did not exist.

I think it does highlight a flaw in the new system, where it is "All or Nothing". Different Categories and Countries move at different speeds and USCIS may have different opinions about individual Filings Dates published by DOS.

I think it was a huge mistake to allow USCIS any say in whether to accept Filing Dates or not, once the initial debacle was sorted out. The accuracy of the Filing Dates is predominantly a function of the quality of information provided by USCIS to DOS when setting them. If USCIS had been forced to accept Filing Dates, they might have also been forced (for their own advantage) to provide better information to DOS.

[gcq]

As far as CO's opinion or lack of opinion about EB3-I, just ignore it. As I have claimed before CO has a bias for EB3-ROW. He will hold the dates till the last few months for EB3-I and in the final months move them drastically forward. I think he is being conservative with EB3-I assuming most of EB3-I applications are pre-adjudicated except for new medical and EVL which can be provided in around a month. The filing date for EB3-I is already in July 2005. Even if USCIS does not accept new applications based on that filing date, they still can dust up EB3-I applications already with them and get ready.

[qesehmk]

As I have claimed before CO has a bias for EB3-ROW. Yes because at least he should be allocating spillover every quarter. That way he will still be on the right side of law. But under the name of not violating law he waits right till the last month every year.

That makes room for doubt that he indeed has a bias for EB3-ROW or worse ... against EB3-India.

[amulchandra]

Yes because at least he should be allocating spillover every quarter. That way he will still be on the right side of law. But under the name of not violating law he waits right till the last month every year.

That makes room for doubt that he indeed has a bias for EB3-ROW or worse ... against EB3-India.

If I can add more spin to this -- EB3 I pre-Aug 2007 applicants are the only people paying for EAD/AP. A combo card is worth 800-1000 dollars.
If you look at it in a different way visa wastage in EB3 causes financial loss to EB3 I applicants.

[anuprab]

Yes because at least he should be allocating spillover every quarter. That way he will still be on the right side of law. But under the name of not violating law he waits right till the last month every year.

That makes room for doubt that he indeed has a bias for EB3-ROW or worse ... against EB3-India.

That is scary, i just hope common sense prevails and the CO moves the dates for EB3I aggressively without wasting any visas. Wasting visas when people are in line for over a decade is akin to blasphemy and needs to be punished severely!!

[anuprab]

and financial gains to USCIS

[Spectator]

As I have claimed before CO has a bias for EB3-ROW. gcq,

If you had said CO seems to have a positive bias towards EB3-P (and EB3-M previously as well), then I might agree.

I think CO just dumps on EB3 in general.

Over the last 5 years (FY2011-FY2015) EB3 has received 10.3k less visas than their allocation. When you don't get any FD from other categories, that's a big deal.

EB3-ROW have been the biggest "victims" in terms of lost visas. Excluding last FY when it can be argued EB3-ROW were effectively Current for half a year, the shortfall over the previous 5 years (FY2010-FY2014) is 36.1k against their nominal allocation. That's about 18 months worth of EB3-ROW average approvals.

That's huge, not only for ROW, but for EB3-I as well. With no vertical spillover, EB3-I rely on FA within EB3 for extra visas. Had ROW received all the visas due, they would have become Current much earlier and EB3-I would have been receiving FA for longer.

[Spectator]

If I can add more spin to this -- EB3 I pre-Aug 2007 applicants are the only people paying for EAD/AP. A combo card is worth 800-1000 dollars.
If you look at it in a different way visa wastage in EB3 causes financial loss to EB3 I applicants.amulchandra,

I agree this is an absolute travesty and a scandal. The charges for EAD and AP for pre August 2007 EB applicants should have been waived long ago, as a humanitarian gesture if nothing else.

[EB3Iwaiting]

Spec, I have gone over this situation (Your Option 1 and 2) several times in my head and discussed with others too. USCIS is unwilling to use Filing Date and as you said, CO will basically have to use Final Action date as he was using before - move it aggressively one month to generate demand and then retrogress. Similar to what he did in the past when there was no Filing Date. I have a very good feeling it will come to that.

Giving USCIS any sort of power in the Visa Bulletin is a disaster. They control Filing Date and hence, it is non-existent at this point. It seems they do not like the Filing Date concept and wants to do away with it and at this point, I too think it is best if it goes away.

[EB3Iwaiting]

Over the last 5 years (FY2011-FY2015) EB3 has received 10.3k less visas than their allocation. When you don't get any FD from other categories, that's a big deal.

EB3-ROW have been the biggest "victims" in terms of lost visas. Excluding last FY when it can be argued EB3-ROW were effectively Current for half a year, the shortfall over the previous 5 years (FY2010-FY2014) is 36.1k against their nominal allocation. That's about 18 months worth of EB3-ROW average approvals.

That's huge, not only for ROW, but for EB3-I as well. With no vertical spillover, EB3-I rely on FA within EB3 for extra visas. Had ROW received all the visas due, they would have become Current much earlier and EB3-I would have been receiving FA for longer.

Why does this make me feel that YT's calculations were too pessimistic? :)

[gcq]

gcq,

If you had said CO seems to have a positive bias towards EB3-P (and EB3-M previously as well), then I might agree. ......

Wasn't this according to the law ( The total usage across FB and EB for a country to calculate 7% ). If it was as per law, can we complain bout CO ? Sure there are lot of unfair things in immigration law. However we can only blame the law in that case. If CO uses his discretionary power to favor a group, then only we can blame CO.

[EB3Iwaiting]

Realistically, there's limits to how high the other EB3 Countries can go and an absolute minimum number of extra visas that will become available to EB3-I.

Maybe CO has not made that estimate yet waiting to give every possible GCs to ROWs. Do we have an idea on the estimate, an absolute minimum number of visas that will be available to EB3I?

[Spectator]

Wasn't this according to the law ( The total usage across FB and EB for a country to calculate 7% ). If it was as per law, can we complain bout CO ? Sure there are lot of unfair things in immigration law. However we can only blame the law in that case. If CO uses his discretionary power to favor a group, then only we can blame CO.gcq,

I take your point, but it seems CO is using a bastardized system that is a hangover from the old spillover allocation system. AC21 introduced new laws on how under use in a Category should be dealt with. It ensured that the full legally mandated allocation for a Category would be reached (as long as there was any demand) by allowing Countries that had reached the 7% limit to consume visas over that limit. It made the old spillover practice redundant and incompatible.

Under the old system, extra allocation effectively also fell down to EB3 with the extra available visa numbers (i.e. the overall limit was effectively raised and the limit from where the visas came from was reduced), so the application of the overall 7% interpretation had no adverse effects on other Countries.

Now we have a situation where (as an example) if EB2-P uses 1.5k less visas than their EB2 allocation, then CO gives that shortfall to both the most retrogressed Country in EB2 (EB2-I) and to give extra visas to EB3-P.

The shortfall is only 1.5k, but 3k of visas are reallocated to other Countries. The only way to balance the books is to reduce the EB3-ROW allocation.

In the example, the 1.5k shortfall should either be allocated to EB2-I (which appears to be the correct treatment since AC21), or allocated to other Philippines categories, but not both at the same time. If the spare visas are mandated by law to be allocated to EB2-I, then they have been used (EB2-P has effectively used its entire allocation) and there are no spare visas left for EB3-P under the overall 7% limit. You can't use something twice at the same time.


If the current practice is to be used, then it should be used consistently.

It doesn't appear that CO is using the same logic for El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras under EB4.

None of those Countries use anywhere near the 7% limit (8.4k, 4.1k & 3.3k vs the 26.0k overall 7% limit in FY2015 and 1.3k, 1.5k & 1.1k vs the 10.1k EB 7% limit in FY2015).

Between them, they could probably use the entire EB4 allocation for FY2016 plus some. If the same logic as is used for Philippines (or South Korea for that matter) was applied, then those 3 Countries should be able to continue using EB4 visas until the total EB4 allocation was exhausted (in this case, that would happen well before they could reach the 7% limit). At that point, the whole of EB4 would become Unavailable.

Alternatively, the same logic as is being applied to the 3 EB4 Countries should also be applied to Philippines et al.

Seems like double standards to me. CO can't pick and choose how he wants to deal with the same situation depending on the Country involved.

[gcq]

Maybe CO has not made that estimate yet waiting to give every possible GCs to ROWs. Do we have an idea on the estimate, an absolute minimum number of visas that will be available to EB3I?
EB3-I and other retrogressed countries can claim a minimum of 7% total EB3 quota ( assuming retrogressed countries have earlier PDs) which equates to around 2800 visas annually. On the other hand EB3-ROW ( assuming that they have the newest PDs) can claim all of the remaining visas. As for EB3-I, minimum is guaranteed as they have oldest PDs. Whereas EB3-Philippines, EB3-South Korea are still considered ROW as their total usage in FB + EB is way below the total 7% of total FB + EB visas. So EB3-SK etc takes up standard EB3-ROW visas as they have older PDs. So EB3-SK etc uses way more visas in EB3 category compared to EB3-I or EB3-ROW.

[gcq]

gcq,

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

Seems like double standards to me. CO can't pick and choose how he wants to deal with the same situation depending on the Country involved.

Totally understand. If that is the case, we should raise it to CO and administration about this inconsistency. I always believed CO is either confused and/or biased in interpreting the law.

An old story, but this is how I figured out CO has a bias:
I had an opportunity to talk with CO regarding under allocation of visas to EB3-I in 2009. Then he maintained it is a "limit" and not a "quota" as far as retrogressed countries are concerned. I corrected him pointing to relevant portions of INA which confirmed it is a quota though it is not mentioned by that name. Throughout the conversation he was "concerned" that he would under allocate for EB3-ROW if he allocated for EB3-I in advance.

[qesehmk]

Had ROW received all the visas due, they would have become Current much earlier and EB3-I would have been receiving FA for longer.
Respectfully Spec, unlike their India counterparts ROW didn't receive their due visas because of lack of visas or wastage of visas. Their applications simply weren't ready to be adjudicated.

EB3-I are being robbed of due visas by not applying quarterly spillovers. ROW is not in that situation at all.

[Spectator]

Respectfully Spec, unlike their India counterparts ROW didn't receive their due visas because of lack of visas or wastage of visas. Their applications simply weren't ready to be adjudicated.

EB3-I are being robbed of due visas by not applying quarterly spillovers. ROW is not in that situation at all.Respectfully Q, that's just not correct.

EB3-ROW did not receive as many visas as they might have done in most years because their allocation was reduced due to additional visas being given to EB3-M and/or EB3-P and due to wastage against the overall EB3 allocation.

This happened consistently at a time when EB3-ROW was retrogressed by several years (as much as 7 years). Had the visas been available, the Cut Off Date for EB3-ROW could have been set well in advance of the date it was set.

It wasn't due to lack of demand for the majority of the time. As such, there probably wouldn't have been any quarterly spillover available.

Lack of demand was a factor in FY2013, when the EB3-ROW COD surpassed July 2007 for the first time.

In FY 2013, EB3-I received Fall Across solely because CO failed to advance the ROW Cut Off Dates sufficiently, or in a timely manner to allow cases to be adjudicated within the FY. The latest COD reached in FY2013 was still more than 3 years retrogressed.

As a result, EB3-ROW fell 9.1k short of the allocation they should have received in FY2013. Even allowing for Philippines, they fell 6.6k short. EB3-I received 4.6k more than their initial allocation. EB3 as a whole fell 1.6k short of their allocation.

[Spectator]

Whichever side of the argument you prefer, I'm struck that there is a certain irony that the failings in the control of visa allocation process that have affected EB3 are also the very same ones that have benefited India the most.

EB has received around 49k extra visas from FB in the period FY2010 to FY2015. Of these, EB2-I has benefited by something around 30k extra visas directly attributable to those extra FB visas.

In a situation where the visa allocation was controlled properly, there would have been zero spare FB visas over that time period, since all FB categories and Countries have been almost perpetually retrogressed.

Only F2A has ever becoming Current in recent times (for a whole 2 months at the end of FY2013 when CO completely misjudged demand). Even then, FB has it's own system for Fall Down of otherwise unused visas, so there should never be any lack of demand within FB as a whole.

DOS can't blame USCIS for those failings, given that around 90% of FB cases are approved at Consular Posts.

[qesehmk]

Well Spec. You have a treasure trove of data and analysis. So I wouldn't argue with you and I respect your judgement.

I have stopped manual analysis for long now. So my judgement is based on past understanding and how EB3ROW has progressed and cleared backlog at PERM 140 and 485 level. It looks eeringly designed to stop India from benefitting.

Secondly i have strong reasons to believe that EB2-3 portings within India probably are resulting in loss of visas. Why? Because the actual approvals fall short of the implied visa usage. Why don't we see appropriate decreases in inventories that are very old (in other words with age the inventory is not going to increase at all with any possible people missing bus).

This makes me believe that for ported candidates USCIS is allocating visas twice and thus resulting in wastage. I think immigrants should request an audit of a few ported cases and verify if these fears are true or false.




Whichever side of the argument you prefer, I'm struck that there is a certain irony that the failings in the control of visa allocation process that have affected EB3 are also the very same ones that have benefited India the most.

EB has received around 49k extra visas from FB in the period FY2010 to FY2015. Of these, EB2-I has benefited by something around 30k extra visas directly attributable to those extra FB visas.

In a situation where the visa allocation was controlled properly, there would have been zero spare FB visas over that time period, since all FB categories and Countries have been almost perpetually retrogressed.

Only F2A has ever becoming Current in recent times (for a whole 2 months at the end of FY2013 when CO completely misjudged demand). Even then, FB has it's own system for Fall Down of otherwise unused visas, so there should never be any lack of demand within FB as a whole.

DOS can't blame USCIS for those failings, given that around 90% of FB cases are approved at Consular Posts.

[Spectator]

EB3-I and other retrogressed countries can claim a minimum of 7% total EB3 quota ( assuming retrogressed countries have earlier PDs) which equates to around 2800 visas annually. On the other hand EB3-ROW ( assuming that they have the newest PDs) can claim all of the remaining visas. As for EB3-I, minimum is guaranteed as they have oldest PDs. Whereas EB3-Philippines, EB3-South Korea are still considered ROW as their total usage in FB + EB is way below the total 7% of total FB + EB visas. So EB3-SK etc takes up standard EB3-ROW visas as they have older PDs. So EB3-SK etc uses way more visas in EB3 category compared to EB3-I or EB3-ROW.gcq,

I've stated many times that I believe the 7% limit should be calculated separately for EB and FB. The law's wording is ambiguous at best. A category approach is best suited to the current laws.

You stated:


On the other hand EB3-ROW (assuming that they have the newest PDs) can claim all of the remaining visas.
It's very easy to think of ROW in the same terms as a Country, but it's not. The term encompasses 165-170 individual Countries and Territories that received a visa in EB2 or EB3 in FY2015. ROW has less than 10x the number of visas available to it in EB3 than 2.8k available to the individual retrogressed Countries. The number left isn't many when you consider the number of Countries it has to service. Other than South Korea, no other Country within ROW comes close to approaching the 2.8k number in EB3 (or EB2 for that matter). In EB3, other than SK, only about 4 other countries break the 1k barrier in a normal year.

[Spectator]

Totally understand. If that is the case, we should raise it to CO and administration about this inconsistency. I always believed CO is either confused and/or biased in interpreting the law.

An old story, but this is how I figured out CO has a bias:
I had an opportunity to talk with CO regarding under allocation of visas to EB3-I in 2009. Then he maintained it is a "limit" and not a "quota" as far as retrogressed countries are concerned. I corrected him pointing to relevant portions of INA which confirmed it is a quota though it is not mentioned by that name. Throughout the conversation he was "concerned" that he would under allocate for EB3-ROW if he allocated for EB3-I in advance.gcq,

Interesting story.

You'll have show me the relevant portions as well.

A quota implies an entitlement. A limit implies a maximum number.

The INA mentions a limit (or level) everywhere I look.


INA: ACT 202 - NUMERICAL LIMITATION TO ANY SINGLE FOREIGN STATE


(2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. - Subject to 1a/ 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 7 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 2 percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.

Since AC21, it's not even a hard limit and since the same limit applies equally to every Country, it can't be described as discriminatory either. I can understand why some people feel it is unfair, but that is a quite different term.

[gcq]

gcq,

Interesting story.

You'll have show me the relevant portions as well.

A quota implies an entitlement. A limit implies a maximum number.

The INA mentions a limit (or level) everywhere I look.





Since AC21, it's not even a hard limit and since the same limit applies equally to every Country, it can't be described as discriminatory either. I can understand why some people feel it is unfair, but that is a quite different term.

Reading INA it is very easy to get misled into believing that it is a limit because the word limit is seen everywhere. If we were to just read those lines, we would believe it is a limit.

However the following makes the limit a quota:


https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-1016.html#0-0-0-180

Sec. 202. [8 U.S.C. 1152]

(a) Per Country Level. -

(1) Nondiscrimination. -

(A) Except as specifically provided in paragraph (2) and in sections 101(a)(27) , 201(b)(2)(A)(i) , and 203, no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person's race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.


This is the very first clause in the section that deals with numerical limitation. What this sentence says is unless and until this limit (7%) is reached, no person should be discriminated based on country of birth among other things. So unless and until CO has already allocated 7% for a retrogressed category, visa allocation should be done purely based on PD. So ROW, retrogressed etc doesn't exist at the beginning of the year. What CO was doing was giving priority to ROW ( which has later PD than India etc) over India even before allocating the 7% to India based on perceived demand. In 2009 India and China received less than their 7% "quota".

[HarepathekaIntezar]

Respectfully Q, that's just not correct.

EB3-ROW did not receive as many visas as they might have done in most years because their allocation was reduced due to additional visas being given to EB3-M and/or EB3-P and due to wastage against the overall EB3 allocation.

This happened consistently at a time when EB3-ROW was retrogressed by several years (as much as 7 years). Had the visas been available, the Cut Off Date for EB3-ROW could have been set well in advance of the date it was set.

It wasn't due to lack of demand for the majority of the time. As such, there probably wouldn't have been any quarterly spillover available.

Lack of demand was a factor in FY2013, when the EB3-ROW COD surpassed July 2007 for the first time.

In FY 2013, EB3-I received Fall Across solely because CO failed to advance the ROW Cut Off Dates sufficiently, or in a timely manner to allow cases to be adjudicated within the FY. The latest COD reached in FY2013 was still more than 3 years retrogressed.

As a result, EB3-ROW fell 9.1k short of the allocation they should have received in FY2013. Even allowing for Philippines, they fell 6.6k short. EB3-I received 4.6k more than their initial allocation. EB3 as a whole fell 1.6k short of their allocation.

Bottomline, it is gonna be 2 more months of waterboarding for EB3I Guys..EB2I was a foregone conclusion..they are hosed this year.

[gcq]

Like to add the following points:

Spec,
When you consider the unfairness to ROW, you are overlooking one critical factor when comparing ROW to India. They are not apples and apples. ROW pd is much later than India applicants. So even if they received more visas, it is still fair, because they were in the queue years earlier :-)

Also regarding the assumption that India received more visas in 2013, I am curious how you guys arrived at that conclusion. If it was based on advancement of PD and hence assuming that all the inventory in that duration was allocated a visa, it could be wrong. Lot of EB3-I ported to EB2-I. When USCIS took up the supposedly EB3-I application, they would have figured out that candidate has already ported. So they moved on to the next EB3-I without approving that ported application. However when we look from outside, we may feel that inventory got cleared by actually allocating a visa and hence the assumption that more visas were allocated to EB3-I. I am not an expert, just a thought.

[GCwaiting]

I have seen lot of comments on EB3-I movement this year FY'16.
Most have said that it is expected to move starting from July/Aug/Sept.
Can we expect the final action date to move at least to July 01 2005 (the filing date announced in Oct'15.)
Also please reply - do you see chance of rollback in Oct again like last year.

[vishnu]

I have seen lot of comments on EB3-I movement this year FY'16.
Most have said that it is expected to move starting from July/Aug/Sept.
Can we expect the final action date to move at least to July 01 2005 (the filing date announced in Oct'15.)
Also please reply - do you see chance of rollback in Oct again like last year.

final action dates for eb3 I should move into 2006 (possibly 2007 but that's a lower chance)

[Suva2001]

I don't think that's a possibility now. If it is to move to the end of 2006 then USCIS should have sent RFEs at least till end of 2005 by now.

Thanks

[vishnu]

I don't think that's a possibility now. If it is to move to the end of 2006 then USCIS should have sent RFEs at least till end of 2005 by now.

Thanks

True - the lack of rfes are concerning. But the applications are all in the system - a rfe even in May
With June deadline can ensure that a visa number is alloyed in August or September to the case.


A friend of mine received his rfe (eb2 case) early February with a March deadline. He sent in the Medicals end of feb and was approved mid March (with card in hand). So I won't lose hope yet

[amulchandra]

True - the lack of rfes are concerning. But the applications are all in the system - a rfe even in May
With June deadline can ensure that a visa number is alloyed in August or September to the case.


A friend of mine received his rfe (eb2 case) early February with a March deadline. He sent in the Medicals end of feb and was approved mid March (with card in hand). So I won't lose hope yet

I am with you Vishnu. Atleast EB3 I should move to mid 2006. I am still hopeful. I will be concerned in June if I do not see any RFEs even after reaching June end. Because by the beginning of June (before they publish the July VB -first bulletin of last quarter) they should assess the SO. They should have clear picture by then. Most of the EB3 I apps are preadjudicated. The only RFEs they are receiving are for EVL,MOS and medicals which are pretty straight forward. I don't think there will be any pending background checks which usually take long time.

By this logic I am still hopeful that EB3 I might move into 2006.

[anuprab]

I don't think that's a possibility now. If it is to move to the end of 2006 then USCIS should have sent RFEs at least till end of 2005 by now.

Thanks

what is the logic behind not generating RFEs for 2005 and/ or 2006 cases till now? Do they intend on wasting visas when people are in line for over a decade?

[Spectator]

Like some others, I too have a sense of disquiet about the EB3-I situation to date. It's an overall feeling, borne out of a number of factors.

a) The Filing Date is supposed to represent where the Final Action Date might reach by the end of the FY. It's been stubbornly set and unmoving at 01JUL05 for EB3-I for the entire FY to date.

b) The above gives USCIS a perfect excuse not to deal with EB3-I cases beyond that date. They'll just blame DOS for not warning them in time.

c) Currently, for USCIS to deal with later cases, it would require them to make an independent executive decision to do so - creating more work for themselves. That would be a first (I know - I'm cynical).

d) It may seem there is still a lot of time left in the FY, but it can be frittered away quite easily. There are multiple steps, all of which require time to complete - cumulatively, it can add up:

i) It's quite possible, given the pace of COD movement for EB3-I in recent years, that the later cases aren't even physically located at the Service Centers and would need to be requested and shipped from satellite storage facilities.

ii) Once received, the cases would need to be sorted and staged at the SC.

iii) The cases can then be allocated to ISO for adjudication or preadjudication along with all the other cases they are already dealing with.

**) Most cases would need the IBIS name check to be rerun, since it is only valid for 180 days. No biggie since that should complete fairly quickly for the vast majority of cases and in parallel with the other steps.

v) Most cases would receive an RFE for EVL, Maintenance Of Status (MOS) and a new I-693. This would be sent to the attorney of record in most cases.

vi) Time for attorney to receive the RFE, process it and send it to the applicant with a list of required information to be returned.

vii) Time for applicant to gather required information, get a new I-693 and return to attorney.

viii) Time for attorney to review applicant response and return to the SC.

ix) Restaging at SC and eventually allocation to an ISO.

x) Inspection of RFE response and final decision by ISO.

It's likely that a large number of cases will be claiming 204(j) portability to "same or similar" jobs. Given the extended time that has passed, some of these may be edge cases that need careful consideration. Again, given the time period, more than usual may be relying on 245(k) for status or employment issues. Complications make the process longer.


I feel that CO needs to move the Filing Date for EB3-I considerably in the June VB, even if the FAD only moves as normal. We know USCIS won't accept it to allow new filings, but it would send a message that USCIS need to deal with later PD applications. Until now, the consistent official message has been that EB3-I will only reach the end of June 2005. Unless there is something we are entirely unaware of, that needs to change sooner rather than later.

[anuprab]

there you go..now i am even more confident they will waste visas..why doesnt the CO just move the Final dates???

[vishnu]

there you go..now i am even more confident they will waste visas..why doesnt the CO just move the Final dates???

spec: last year some spillover from eb3 row went to eb2 I rather than eb3 I...it wasn't direct, but a result of the EB2 I overallocation at the start of the year (and hence eb2 row needed to be 'funded' to ensure their quota was utilized)

so can CO possibly use eb3 row spill over visas for eb2 india again? clearly not as per the book, but he did it last year?

[Spectator]

there you go..now i am even more confident they will waste visas..why doesnt the CO just move the Final dates???
From a technical point of view, CO may not believe he has enough visas left in Q3 against the maximums he is allowed to use for the approval numbers that would generate.

Since he seems to have quite often ignored this in the past when it suited him, I don't think that really holds water. At this stage it also becomes hard to believe that he is still of the opinion that EB3-WW will use vast numbers.


spec: last year some spillover from eb3 row went to eb2 I rather than eb3 I...it wasn't direct, but a result of the EB2 I overallocation at the start of the year (and hence eb2 row needed to be 'funded' to ensure their quota was utilized)

so can CO possibly use eb3 row spill over visas for eb2 india again? clearly not as per the book, but he did it last year?
It's impossible to deny what happened in terms of the numbers.

Looking at the usage pattern, it's also hard to imagine that CO was not aware of the situation at the time he set the September 2015 VB (since he retrogressed EB2-I by more than 2 years), or shortly afterwards.

Of course, the correct action would have been to retrogress EB2-WW, either in the September VB, or internally once EB2 reached the maximum. He has always had a certain reticence to do that - perhaps because it is an admission of failure.

Alternatively, because the EB3-I COD was moved forward so late, it's not impossible that USCIS simply could not bring enough cases to a point where they could be approved in the time remaining in the FY.

Rather than waste visas against the overall allocation, CO allowed EB2 to continue approvals (even if that was not allowed). If that was the case, he did EB2-I a double favor - had those EB2-WW cases not been approved in FY2015, they would have been approved in FY2016. In that case, more visas would have been wasted in FY2015 and EB2-WW would likely use all (or a good part of) SO that will be available in FY2016.

I don't think we will ever know what truly happened, or why. Mistakes do happen, but the important thing is to learn from them and not repeat them. I'm not sure the EB3 lesson has been learned, or the dangers associated with allocating SO in EB2 too early.

[anuprab]

From a technical point of view, CO may not believe he has enough visas left in Q3 against the maximums he is allowed to use for the approval numbers that would generate.

Since he seems to have quite often ignored this in the past when it suited him, I don't think that really holds water. At this stage it also becomes hard to believe that he is still of the opinion that EB3-WW will use vast numbers.


It's impossible to deny what happened in terms of the numbers.

Looking at the usage pattern, it's also hard to imagine that CO was not aware of the situation at the time he set the September 2015 VB (since he retrogressed EB2-I by more than 2 years), or shortly afterwards.

Of course, the correct action would have been to retrogress EB2-WW, either in the September VB, or internally once EB2 reached the maximum. He has always had a certain reticence to do that - perhaps because it is an admission of failure.

Alternatively, because the EB3-I COD was moved forward so late, it's not impossible that USCIS simply could not bring enough cases to a point where they could be approved in the time remaining in the FY.

Rather than waste visas against the overall allocation, CO allowed EB2 to continue approvals (even if that was not allowed). If that was the case, he did EB2-I a double favor - had those EB2-WW cases not been approved in FY2015, they would have been approved in FY2016. In that case, more visas would have been wasted in FY2015 and EB2-WW would likely use all (or a good part of) SO that will be available in FY2016.

I don't think we will ever know what truly happened, or why. Mistakes do happen, but the important thing is to learn from them and not repeat them. I'm not sure the EB3 lesson has been learned, or the dangers associated with allocating SO in EB2 too early.

I hope so too Spec...on another note seeing some RFEs being reported for Jan/Feb 2005 EB3I. if the pace continues and its just May, maybe just maybe EB3I wont be punished this year!

[HarepathekaIntezar]

Respectfully Spec, unlike their India counterparts ROW didn't receive their due visas because of lack of visas or wastage of visas. Their applications simply weren't ready to be adjudicated.

EB3-I are being robbed of due visas by not applying quarterly spillovers. ROW is not in that situation at all.

I totally agree with this. Wonder what the loudmouths at (the 2 words got bleeped out) are doing about this?

[asaxena2]

I hope so too Spec...on another note seeing some RFEs being reported for Jan/Feb 2005 EB3I. if the pace continues and its just May, maybe just maybe EB3I wont be punished this year!



Trackitt forum has reported rfes till Feb 2005 .Initally , NSC RFES were issued, last few days TSC has also become active.

[anuprab]

Trackitt forum has reported rfes till Feb 2005 .Initally , NSC RFES were issued, last few days TSC has also become active.

been quiet so wondering if anyone has anything positive to say for EB3I...i just wish they move the dates although 2006 seems hopeless for this year..YTEleven's chart is the only silver lining...

[GCwaiting]

What is in store for EB3-I now? What does this all mean to EB3-I?
Will there be any movement beyond 3 weeks monthly in FY'16?
What do the experts here say??

[amulchandra]

What is in store for EB3-I now? What does this all mean to EB3-I?
Will there be any movement beyond 3 weeks monthly in FY'16?
What do the experts here say??

This means EB2 I is the new EB3 I. I feel that EB3 I should get some SO this year. How much I do not know, may be 8-10k. Since the SO is applied only in the last quarter we can expect movement only in the last quarter. There will be no over allocation to EB2 I from EB3 like last year. As a result the movement should be better than last year for EB3 I.

There is less SO for EB2 I which means EB2 ROW demand has increased a lot. But since there is no dramatic increase in PERM filings I am hoping the demand in EB3 ROW is stable. So if things remain the same, Eb3 I should receive at least 8k SO this year. It would have been the case last year too, if EB2 I was not over allocated.

[amulchandra]

After this year's super hit-flop show of visa bulletins what do you all think about EB3 India's future next year. Will it at least reach end of 2006 next FY? I know that it is too early to predict but couldn't stop myself from asking.Feel completely exhausted because of this stupid process. I think for the first 3 quarters, we need not even watch VBs as the dates will be glued to March 2005 for EB3 I due to the sheer volume of pending 485s. Looking for any glimmer of SO at the end of FY provided PERM numbers come down. I am not expecting any legislative fixes.

[EB3Iwaiting]

Looking for any glimmer of SO at the end of FY provided PERM numbers come down. I am not expecting any legislative fixes.

That is what I am hoping for too - that PERM certifications will come down. That is the only hope as EB3I will only get relief from EB3ROW SO.

[anuprab]

That is what I am hoping for too - that PERM certifications will come down. That is the only hope as EB3I will only get relief from EB3ROW SO.

same shit repeated year after year, i was so hopeful last year after trolling all forums for EB3I but looks like these guys don't want to clear the backlog...hoping for a better 2017. PERMs are down but I am sure something else will come up!
hate this super f$%^& up immigration.

[asaxena2]

After this year's super hit-flop show of visa bulletins what do you all think about EB3 India's future next year. Will it at least reach end of 2006 next FY? I know that it is too early to predict but couldn't stop myself from asking.Feel completely exhausted because of this stupid process. I think for the first 3 quarters, we need not even watch VBs as the dates will be glued to March 2005 for EB3 I due to the sheer volume of pending 485s. Looking for any glimmer of SO at the end of FY provided PERM numbers come down. I am not expecting any legislative fixes.

My pd is first week of March 2005.When can I expect my PD to be current ?

[Spectator]

My pd is first week of March 2005.When can I expect my PD to be current ?I won't try to answer the question directly.

What I will say is that you have a statistically much better chance because your PD is in the first week of March.

As part of the Chinese EB3 lawsuit, CO released the IVAMS figures for EB3 as of July 19, 2010. That showed that EB3-I applications are not distributed evenly for March 2005 - the majority are in the last week.

Mar 1 to Mar 7 ------- 7.8% = FAD of 08MAR05
Mar 8 to Mar 14 ----- 10.7% = FAD of 15MAR05
Mar 15 to Mar 21 ---- 14.2% = FAD of 22MAR05
Mar 22 to Mar 31 ---- 67.3% = FAD of 01APR05

The % are likely to have remained similar over time.

The reason is almost certainly due to the RIR / PERM changeover for labor certification.

[asaxena2]

I won't try to answer the question directly.

What I will say is that you have a statistically much better chance because your PD is in the first week of March.

As part of the Chinese EB3 lawsuit, CO released the IVAMS figures for EB3 as of July 19, 2010. That showed that EB3-I applications are not distributed evenly for March 2005 - the majority are in the last week.

Mar 1 to Mar 7 ------- 7.8% = FAD of 08MAR05
Mar 8 to Mar 14 ----- 10.7% = FAD of 15MAR05
Mar 15 to Mar 21 ---- 14.2% = FAD of 22MAR05
Mar 22 to Mar 31 ---- 67.3% = FAD of 01APR05

The % are likely to have remained similar over time.

The reason is almost certainly due to the RIR / PERM changeover for labor certification.
------------------------------
Excellent analysis, 'Spectator'

[EB3Iwaiting]

S Korea is dominating ROW. Even last year, they took almost 10k GCs in the EB category. Their FB demand is very low allowing them to take more in EB and still stay in ROW.

[Spectator]

S Korea is dominating ROW. Even last year, they took almost 10k GCs in the EB category. Their FB demand is very low allowing them to take more in EB and still stay in ROW.It's true that SK have very low use in FB and have the potential to use many more visas and still stay within the overall 7% limit.

For FY2015 the allocations for FB and EB were 226,000 and 144,796 respectively. The overall 7% limit was 25,956. https://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/law-and-policy/bulletin/2015/visa-bulletin-for-september-2015.html

Although not strictly correct, prorated, it could be thought of as:

FB = 226,000 * 7% = 15,820
EB = 144,796 * 7% = 10,136

South Korea used 1,028 FB visas and 9,926 EB visas in FY2015, so SK didn't even reach the prorated 7% for EB.

[EB3Iwaiting]

With high SK filings in recent years, they will probably go past their 7% in EB soon. But it is amazing that they only took 1k in FB last year. Guess it it the first generations who have started to come here now. I am afraid that with low FB quota, they will take out more from EB quota and still stay within the ROW which takes out more from SO. Last years stats do suggest that they are more EB2 than EB3.

[Dukeldh]

My priority date is January 2011 EB3-I. When should I expect to apply for ead. Thanks!

[kiran_july_2004]

My priority date is January 2011 EB3-I. When should I expect to apply for ead. Thanks!

Considering the current situation, it might take anywhere between 2 to 5 years. Advice is to prepare with alternatives and stay positive.

[idliman]

My priority date is January 2011 EB3-I. When should I expect to apply for ead. Thanks!
This cannot be determined as of now. Only scenarios can be discussed. You need to discuss both EB2I & EB3I together. There is upward and downward porting from one Q to another Q. So for all practical purposes they will stay close to one another.
You know that for EB2I, PDs are in the first half of 2009 for the last 5 years or so. It is being told that it will take another 3 years for EB2I, 2009 to clear without any spillover. What is interesting is that due to EO, there may be some spillover from FB to EB. It can be as high as 100,000 to as low as say 20,000. These are decided by the admin and one call from Stephen Miller can make or break all our lives. I suggest you to read the prediction forum for an understanding. Bottom line is there will be a spillover, however the admin has always found creative ways (subtle change in policy) to deny spillover to India/China in the last few years. Everyone is hoping for a decent spillover. If that happens, then 2009 will get cleared faster.

Based on my personal heartbreaks and hopes for PDs to move, Just assume that you get 3K+3K for EB2I and EB3I. Then try to calculate demand approximately (or use paid services like whereismygc). The paid services will give you more accurate demand data and prediction. However, policy decisions are at the hand of administration. Anything can happen. Best case scenario for you is 2 to 3 years. Worst case scenario, I don't even want to say it. Good Luck and Welcome to this forum.