EB2-3 Predictions (Rather Calculations)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Don't forget in a normal year the total approved GCs are well over 1M of which at least 0.5M are 485s and only 140K EBs. So 29K out of 120K is not materially different from historical proportions. But I do agree that compared to available visas this is low.

---

Why does the link for FY21 Q3 data under 'https://www.uscis.gov/tools/reports-and-studies/immigration-and-citizenship-data' goes to Page not Found??

USCIS removed it after publishing it for a reason?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Positive

The way things are going, I would not be surprised if majority of October 2020 filers never get approved, most spillover visas are wasted and dates retrogress to 2010 once the pandemic subsides. These filers will essentially have the same fate as the filers in 2012 (having up to May 2010 PD) who were lucky to get EAD/AP but did not again become current until the pandemic spillover. Anyone who isn't downgrading and filing their I485 and securing their EAD/AP at the earliest opportunity, whether due to employer unwillingness, being secure with the EB2/H1b employer, or for avoiding EB2/EB3 switching back and forth or the noble cause of reducing "unnecessary" USCIS workload may live to regret it. EAD/AP may not be GC but it is close. You may or may not want to use it immediately but it is a very nice thing to have. Just my two cents.

---

Didn't Charlie/others mention that the dates (EB3 - 2014) will not be retrogressed ? I was hoping that the window of time to downgrade will be available for considerably more time for EB2 2012-2013 applicants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ImmiGiveMe

Why does the link for FY21 Q3 data under 'https://www.uscis.gov/tools/reports-and-studies/immigration-and-citizenship-data' goes to Page not Found??

USCIS removed it after publishing it for a reason?

---

In addition to being inefficient, USCIS has a history of not being transparent. They publish nothing, they publish late, they publish half truths, they publish wrong things. In short they do as they please. We will never know what was the reason they unpublished. Could be anything.

It may not retrogress until aug/sept 2022 but a bird in hand is better than .... If the Meng amendment does succeed, the flood of EB visas available because of family visa spillover from 2020 and 2021 will completely disappear. Considering:
- Dems have always favored family based immigrants over EB applicants, GOP has also become largely anti-EB immigrant with Miller/Bannon et al. holding sway, and there is additional persuasive argument that the amendment simply preserves the status quo disturbed by the pandemic; and
- USCIS does not process any or most of the spill over for the current fiscal, which seems more and more plausible and I would not be surprised that this may be intentional, aided and abetted by Meng amenmdnent supporters in the administration& Congress,
the rationale for date advancement in EB2 and EB3 India completely disappears as soon as the spillover disappears.
Call me alarmist, but the above is a very rational and plausible outcome. Now, why would Charlie reassure that retrogression isn't foreseeable despite the Meng amendment? Who in the administration wants the backlogged EB folks to wake up and start opposing the Meng amendment tooth and nail before it is signed and sealed? No one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gammaray

I will post one last time without responding to anyone particular so no one feels obligated to write back.

USCIS processing includes third party sites like lockboxes and biometric centers that are integral to the process and can't be done remotely. Applications have to be processed physically at lockboxes; letters, rfe's have to be mailed physically by someone.

But people want to believe its racism or bias that's the cause of administrative delay for all of EB-I categories, and some piling on to just EB1C-I. Widespread abuse in EB1C couldn't possibly be the reason why certain category of people are issued more RFE's or scrutinized more. I must really be stupid (yes I read that) to even think that. Hell American history has is it, and there was a civil war, so it must be true. Hence proved.

---

Wide spread EB1 C abuse. Any real proof for it other than your friend's friends cousin's nephew's neighbor's dad's got it and you know that he is inefficient. You are also the judge with access to every single documents on the basis of which USCIS which approved the petition?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

Wide spread EB1 C abuse. Any real proof for it other than your friend's friends cousin's nephew's neighbor's dad's got it and you know that he is inefficient. You are also the judge with access to every single documents on the basis of which USCIS which approved the petition?

---

And this from someone asking for proof of bias in USCIS even after people gave so many circumstantial evidences through multiple years

The idea that EB India beneficiaries are less deserving, more manipulative or corrupt than others is plain baloney, myopic self flaggelation. There is also this sense by certain individuals stuck in the backlog that they are more qualified, deseving or honest than their fellow Indians in that backlog. Objective analysis easily proves these notions wrong. Indian EB applicants are hired at among the highest average and median salaries and in sectors more in need of qualified immigrants than most others. Are family based immigrants more deserving? Has anybody seen what qualifies for a deserving asylee? Sikkhs from punjab have been successfully claiming persecution before the USCIS. Random people from random countries successfully claim asylee visas based on merely their sexual orientation. When people don't see the macro picture and see who all get the 1 million visas every year or the 140k EB visas but just the narrow subset of Indian beneficiaries, it is easy to run ones own down and blame the community for and deserving of languishing in the backlog.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inspired_p

And this from someone asking for proof of bias in USCIS even after people gave so many circumstantial evidences through multiple years

---

In general USCIS have no bias against Indian applicants while every EB1C applicant is a fraud even though the same USCIS is validating it.

Do I sound like a troll ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

In general USCIS have no bias against Indian applicants while every EB1C applicant is a fraud even though the same USCIS is validating it.

Do I sound like a troll ?

---

Gammaray interjected "EB1-C fraud" in the discussion when hardly anybody had raised it. We are all better off not picking this bait.
We don't have to play countries or categories against each other.

QQ to the group - Does the Meng update have to be passed before Sep 31st 2021 to be applicable for the next fiscal year or can it be retroactively applied? Basically my question boils down to when is the absolute last drop dead date by which the update needs to be passed into law to affect the 2022 spillover.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by namits

QQ to the group - Does the Meng update have to be passed before Sep 31st 2021 to be applicable for the next fiscal year or can it be retroactively applied? Basically my question boils down to when is the absolute last drop dead date by which the update needs to be passed into law to affect the 2022 spillover.

---

Technically a law can be applied retroactively but since people can and will always challenge it - laws are generally made to go in effect in future.

Meng's amendment I believe must be part of some budget reconciliation process rather than be a standalone thing, so those things also have their own timeline. Others on this forum are much more savvy when it comes to house and senate rules and processes. Perhaps they can comment.

Thanks Q!! I believe it is part of H.R. 4431: Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2022 and the bill has 32% chance of being enacted.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/hr4431

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by namits

QQ to the group - Does the Meng update have to be passed before Sep 31st 2021 to be applicable for the next fiscal year or can it be retroactively applied? Basically my question boils down to when is the absolute last drop dead date by which the update needs to be passed into law to affect the 2022 spillover.

---

Going by Charlie's comments, I think he is holding off all spillover visa effect until dec. 2021. That is probably when it may be too late. In any case if the USCIS ends up wasting spillovers any which way, it does not matter except for opportunity for EAD/AP for more applicants if the filing dates are moved as a consequence of spillover from 2021 family category to the extent it is not neutralized by wastage of spillover this fiscal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Positive

Going by Charlie's comments, I think he is holding off all spillover visa effect until dec. 2021. That is probably when it may be too late. In any case if the USCIS ends up wasting spillovers any which way, it does not matter except for opportunity for EAD/AP for more applicants if the filing dates are moved as a consequence of spillover from 2021 family category to the extent it is not neutralized by wastage of spillover this fiscal.

---

We should not be sitting down and taking it silently. I encourage people to write in and question Charlie for the next DOS update. Is he NOT moving the visa dates because of the potential legislation in the works? If yes, can he move the visa dates taking into account the Eagle Act another potential legislation, which proposes the removal of arbitrary 7% country cap. We need to corner him on this one so that we are not looking at potential retrogression in Q2 FY 2022.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vsivarama

We should not be sitting down and taking it silently. I encourage people to write in and question Charlie for the next DOS update. Is he NOT moving the visa dates because of the potential legislation in the works? If yes, can he move the visa dates taking into account the Eagle Act another potential legislation, which proposes the removal of arbitrary 7% country cap. We need to corner him on this one so that we are not looking at potential retrogression in Q2 FY 2022.

---

I just don't think he is answerable to us even though those chats may make it appear so. The only people who can influence his decisions are people in the Biden administartion and to some extent congress. This is where advocacy groups come in. But the one only one that exists (because they hound out any and every other attempt at building up alternative advocacy groups by any all means necessary) has already alienated Durbin and is really not interested in pursuing tangible loaw hanging fruits like usage of the pandemic visa spillover (notwithstanding their eleventh hour shouting about 100k wastage after deep slumber through the year). They care for coutry cap removal more than backlog removal...but I digress.

Coming back to Charlie, the way visas are allocated and spillover is applied in the last quarter etc. such that priority is given to ensuring that 7% visas are available to all other countries even if that means thousands of visas are wasted and projected backlog for one country grows longer than human life span is a choice. That this wasteful waiting game has to be played even though:
- all historical data indicates that there are enough visas available to never have a situation where the availabilty for ROW would fall short;
-when processing times have exceeded well above 12 months, insisting on exhausting all ROW applications before taking up the backlogged by holding off their filing dates means the system isn't really first in first out even allowing for country caps but rather first in last out for Indians and last in first out for others;
-the two date visa bulletin was ostensibly created to avoid visa wastage but is really one additional administrative tool to perpetuate and fortify the backlog.

I could go on but suffice to say none of these procedural administrative decisions are based on the immigration statute, the legislative text passed by congress, rather they are policy choices and slight of hand employed by agencies that is not answerable to its stakeholders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vsivarama

I do not think it is going to be that big of a deal here. I have never heard of a case where someone could not naturalize or had the GC revoked because of job change just before or after GC. If you want to be absolutely in the clear then apply for naturalization after 5 years are complete on your GC.

---

Thanks for your inputs.

I read in forums that couple of cases during naturalization USCIS officer asked for proof of employment(pay stubs) for the GC sponsoring firm post approval. Not sure what made the officer to ask that question but in general it looks like majority shouldn't run into any issues during naturalization.

My employer agreed to submit I-485J now and I hope that USCIS ties it to my already approved I-485 petition. All this confusion happened because of the delay caused by my employer and the law firm to submit I-485J/ AC21 on time. I hope I get some kind of confirmation that my new I-485J is approved soon.

Thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

Wide spread EB1 C abuse. Any real proof for it other than your friend's friends cousin's nephew's neighbor's dad's got it and you know that he is inefficient. You are also the judge with access to every single documents on the basis of which USCIS which approved the petition?

---

Actually it was your friend's friends cousin's nephew's neighbor's dad's and he is definitely deficient. You can probably confirm that better than me. Or you can continue to bury the head in the sand. I am not judging any petitions -- USCIS approximately approves 92% of applications across the board (H1-B's, EBs, I-485) till recently. So does that mean no abuse existed within IT firms hiring practices over the years? This includes h1bs. Could it mean the rules were loose enough for people to find a way around? Or of course it had to be racial discrimination that rules were tightened for third party and specialty occupations. If you lived in the country long enough you would know how many "desi consultancies" were around in the previous decade that applied for h1bs/EBs after a 3 month "training" irrespective of what degree a person held, while showing fake resumes to clients. Most if not all of these folks that applied in the mid-2000's are greened now. But since USCIS approved those petitions and there is no data, it must be false.
It's similar for EB1C which was current for the longest time. Then suddenly the demand increased, as the backlogs in other categories materialized. There is no denying the Trump administration throttled EB1C's, H4s', H1b's and whatever else. But that's on the administration not because apparently undoubtedly USCIS is an inherently racist organization (against one particular country or rather one specific category),

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inspired_p

And this from someone asking for proof of bias in USCIS even after people gave so many circumstantial evidences through multiple years

---

You don't understand the concept of evidence do you? "Multiple years?" "so many evidence?" Just making a statement is not "evidence". I would love to see the data, and the analysis behind it. The double irony is that my statement about abuse in EB is without merit without evidence, however USCIS is biased towards one country and category is just accepted fact by making statements.

In reading through the Meng Amendment proposal - "Meng?s measures would allow unused family-based, employment-based, and diversity visas that were allocated in fiscal years 2020 and 2021 to remain available in fiscal year 2022 and beyond until they are used".

So even if the amendment is passed and applied retroactively - then the 100k or so GC's that can possibly go to waste (if not used be Sep 30th) in the EB category will be available in 2022 and if it is not passed then the spillover from FB will be available for the EB category in 2022. So is this not a win-win situation or am I missing something?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by namits

In reading through the Meng Amendment proposal - "Meng?s measures would allow unused family-based, employment-based, and diversity visas that were allocated in fiscal years 2020 and 2021 to remain available in fiscal year 2022 and beyond until they are used".

So even if the amendment is passed and applied retroactively - then the 100k or so GC's that can possibly go to waste (if not used be Sep 30th) in the EB category will be available in 2022 and if it is not passed then the spillover from FB will be available for the EB category in 2022. So is this not a win-win situation or am I missing something?

---

Yes in that sense eitherway it is ok for EB. But if these guys are anyway passing laws then they might as well as capture all and more visas and eliminate all backlogs and double immigration limits. But they try to do incremental changes so that the real problem never gets solved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Yes in that sense eitherway it is ok for EB. But if these guys are anyway passing laws then they might as well as capture all and more visas and eliminate all backlogs and double immigration limits. But they try to do incremental changes so that the real problem never gets solved.

---

Doubling immigration quota or even increasing it by say 25% is almost impossible. It is unlikely to pass the house and senate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Yes in that sense eitherway it is ok for EB. But if these guys are anyway passing laws then they might as well as capture all and more visas and eliminate all backlogs and double immigration limits. But they try to do incremental changes so that the real problem never gets solved.

---

So then it either way there should be no reason to slowdown the GC processing. Full steam ahead :-)

I reached out to my local congressman to expedite the I-485 hoping it might help as he is on the Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship.
His office is asking for a documented evidence of dire hardship this delay has caused. Any suggestions on what kind of documented evidence can I provide ?

-Thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gsingh

I reached out to my local congressman to expedite the I-485 hoping it might help as he is on the Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship.
His office is asking for a documented evidence of dire hardship this delay has caused. Any suggestions on what kind of documented evidence can I provide ?

-Thanks

---

Just let him know how many years you have been waiting, and then switch to another congressman or senator. His office clearly isn't going to be helpful IMHO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gsingh

I reached out to my local congressman to expedite the I-485 hoping it might help as he is on the Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship.
His office is asking for a documented evidence of dire hardship this delay has caused. Any suggestions on what kind of documented evidence can I provide ?

-Thanks

---

What I heard directly from a Congressional office USCIS caseworker is that USCIS almost has a blanket policy of denying these expedite requests.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Just let him know how many years you have been waiting, and then switch to another congressman or senator. His office clearly isn't going to be helpful IMHO.

---

My expedite request with USCIS (Customer Support Line) was denied. So was my expedite with a house representative.
I want to at some point start expedite with Senators, but am apprehensive - as I read at few places that multiple expedite requests piss off USCIS and *maybe* even end up slowing down the processing. This was also hinted at in Charlie's call - he mentioned that USCIS is getting swamped with expedite requests !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gsingh

I reached out to my local congressman to expedite the I-485 hoping it might help as he is on the Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship.
His office is asking for a documented evidence of dire hardship this delay has caused. Any suggestions on what kind of documented evidence can I provide ?

-Thanks

---

We had tried Sen. Feinstein's office for my wife's H4-EAD last year. Not very helpful, rude at times, and the office messed up the supporting information we had sent. USCIS rejected the request. We avoided going to anyone else. What saved us was joining the lawsuit and she got her EAD in a couple of weeks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by newyorker123

My expedite request with USCIS (Customer Support Line) was denied. So was my expedite with a house representative.
I want to at some point start expedite with Senators, but am apprehensive - as I read at few places that multiple expedite requests piss off USCIS and *maybe* even end up slowing down the processing. This was also hinted at in Charlie's call - he mentioned that USCIS is getting swamped with expedite requests !

---

I think there is no official expedite request that a congressman/senator can submit. But one can always ask for status and what is holding something back. My wife's citizenship was pending for a long time and so when she asked local congressman's office they said they will do something if the wait becomes unusual (which eventually it didn't).

So I guess the rule of thumb in asking assistance is - seek assistance when you think you are falling outside normal processing times.

Otherwise truly do not bother them. My 2 cents!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

I think there is no official expedite request that a congressman/senator can submit. But one can always ask for status and what is holding something back. My wife's citizenship was pending for a long time and so when she asked local congressman's office they said they will do something if the wait becomes unusual (which eventually it didn't).

So I guess the rule of thumb in asking assistance is - seek assistance when you think you are falling outside normal processing times.

Otherwise truly do not bother them. My 2 cents!

---

My son's EAD was not issued along with us and I opened a SR ticket last month end. I called yesterday, and I found the SR was closed on August 4th, the reason assigned to an Officer. I said it is August 26th and I still have not heard any thing about it. The agent just made a remark every body wants their files to be processed yesterday. Same thing with my RFE for 485 it is more than 100 days, same response with an officer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gsingh

I reached out to my local congressman to expedite the I-485 hoping it might help as he is on the Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship.
His office is asking for a documented evidence of dire hardship this delay has caused. Any suggestions on what kind of documented evidence can I provide ?

-Thanks

---

Unfortunately that's why expediting I-485 will not go anywhere usually because the applicant is already gainfully employed with a very high compensation compared to the median wage. I mean obviously the USCIS is supposed to provide true service in return for the thousands of dollars we fork over to them over our immigration journey, but that just gets lost or ignored.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

My son's EAD was not issued along with us and I opened a SR ticket last month end. I called yesterday, and I found the SR was closed on August 4th, the reason assigned to an Officer. I said it is August 26th and I still have not heard any thing about it. The agent just made a remark every body wants their files to be processed yesterday. Same thing with my RFE for 485 it is more than 100 days, same response with an officer.

---

I have similar experience, I am current since July 1st and the file is documentarily complete. 485 processing times are unrealistically long so could not raise an SR for it but I did raise SR for 131 and 765 since both are out of processing times, the SR was closed in August first week with no response. I chatted with Emma yesterday and the agent created another SR because the first one was closed without any response.! I was hoping that 131/765 might trigger something but it didn't seem to help. My worry is we do not know how the processing would be come new fiscal.. Fingers Crossed..

Thanks everyone. Appreciate your inputs.

@Noesis , @AceMan - Same here.
Tried to expedite 765s. First for my wife with the evidence of a job loss and a new job offer and then for myself with expiring DL. Both were denied
SRs for 765 were closed with following update - Your case is currently in line for processing and adjudication. Cases are processed in the order in which they were received.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by namits

In reading through the Meng Amendment proposal - "Meng?s measures would allow unused family-based, employment-based, and diversity visas that were allocated in fiscal years 2020 and 2021 to remain available in fiscal year 2022 and beyond until they are used".

So even if the amendment is passed and applied retroactively - then the 100k or so GC's that can possibly go to waste (if not used be Sep 30th) in the EB category will be available in 2022 and if it is not passed then the spillover from FB will be available for the EB category in 2022. So is this not a win-win situation or am I missing something?

---

The wording is not clear, it seems to say FB stays in FB and EB stays in EB for 2020 and 2021. Since the 100K EB unused were originally from FB 2020, it can be interpreted that they would go back to FB in FY2022 and not stay with EB.

The reason the wording is is not clear is that it's a copy paste from last year's covid relief bill so the FB visas weren't spilled over yet. There is a very good chance that they will change the language in consultation with USCIS and State Department before passing it, but they will probably pick the interpretation that those visas go to FB, since their motive is to erase the impact of covid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

So I guess the rule of thumb in asking assistance is - seek assistance when you think you are falling outside normal processing times.

Otherwise truly do not bother them. My 2 cents!

---

The only problem with this approach is i) In which universe would a 765 approval taking a year be considered normal processing time? It's 10 months now but soon it will be a year. In which universe would a 485 approval taking 60+ months be considered normal processing time? I am not talking about retrogression here as USCIS does not consider retrogression while calculating the normal processing time. Do we have documented proof of hardship, probably not. But I know many people in this forum are probably losing sleep everyday thinking about our ageing parents back in India in this pandemic. We cannot get H1B stamped if we travel to India and we are still waiting on EAD + AP after 10 months of filing. Yes, the administration cares about the humanitarian crisis abroad, but what about the humanitarian crisis in US? If you look up processing time for AP in Texas, it's 1- 5 months for Refugee or asylee applying for a refugee travel document while it's 6 Months to 8 Months for us. I am not against approving a travel document for refugees. But how many refugees who come to this country fleeing persecution are actually clamoring to travel to their country? If this is not bias against us, I do not know what is. It's either bias or the entire crew of USCIS not having a couple of brain cells to rub together. I do not know which one is worse though.. Enough with my rant, Happy weekend y'all!!

P.S. - My guess is Afghans trying to flee the country do not have a documented proof of hardship either. Or may be the Taliban is gracious enough to provide them with notarized letters threatening their well being to submit to US authorities. What do I know. :):):)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

My son's EAD was not issued along with us and I opened a SR ticket last month end. I called yesterday, and I found the SR was closed on August 4th, the reason assigned to an Officer. I said it is August 26th and I still have not heard any thing about it. The agent just made a remark every body wants their files to be processed yesterday. Same thing with my RFE for 485 it is more than 100 days, same response with an officer.

---

Hope you get your GC soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rsnake

The wording is not clear, it seems to say FB stays in FB and EB stays in EB for 2020 and 2021. Since the 100K EB unused were originally from FB 2020, it can be interpreted that they would go back to FB in FY2022 and not stay with EB.

The reason the wording is is not clear is that it's a copy paste from last year's covid relief bill so the FB visas weren't spilled over yet. There is a very good chance that they will change the language in consultation with USCIS and State Department before passing it, but they will probably pick the interpretation that those visas go to FB, since their motive is to erase the impact of covid.

---

I agree. The intent of the legislation was to nullify the effect of Covid closures, so no matter how the law reads itself , it will be interpreted to revert FB-> EB spillovers from 2020 and 2021.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rsnake

The wording is not clear, it seems to say FB stays in FB and EB stays in EB for 2020 and 2021. Since the 100K EB unused were originally from FB 2020, it can be interpreted that they would go back to FB in FY2022 and not stay with EB.

The reason the wording is is not clear is that it's a copy paste from last year's covid relief bill so the FB visas weren't spilled over yet. There is a very good chance that they will change the language in consultation with USCIS and State Department before passing it, but they will probably pick the interpretation that those visas go to FB, since their motive is to erase the impact of covid.

---

Correct. Anyone who is reading the Meng amendment to allow FB to EB spillover in 2021 is in for a rude shock. Here is what she is intending, straight from the horses mouth (https://meng.house.gov/media-center/...luded-in-key):
"Meng?s measures would allow unused family-based, employment-based, and diversity visas that were allocated in fiscal years 2020 and 2021 to remain available in fiscal year 2022 and beyond until they are used." This paragraph is preceded by the fllowing:
"The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) allocates 480,000 visas annually for family-sponsored categories; 140,000 visas annually for employment-sponsored categories; and 55,000 for diversity visas. Due to COVID-19 and the curtailing of immigration operations both abroad at U.S. embassies and consulates, and at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), only a fraction of these visa allocations were used in fiscal year 2020 or will be used by the end of the current 2021 fiscal year which concludes in October."

Essentially, MENG would take away any FB spillover into EB for the current and next fiscal years. All we get is the 5/10% EB visas that were wasted in 2020 and a preservation of any unused visas from 2021's annual quota of 140K. Now, please don't argue how will they restore to FB visas from 2020 that have been allocated and will be used up by EB this year. Plainly, USCIS is carefully working to ensure that not even 140K EB visas are issued this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Positive

Correct. Anyone who is reading the Meng amendment to allow FB to EB spillover in 2021 is in for a rude shock. Here is what she is intending, straight from the horses mouth (https://meng.house.gov/media-center/...luded-in-key):
"Meng?s measures would allow unused family-based, employment-based, and diversity visas that were allocated in fiscal years 2020 and 2021 to remain available in fiscal year 2022 and beyond until they are used." This paragraph is preceded by the fllowing:
"The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) allocates 480,000 visas annually for family-sponsored categories; 140,000 visas annually for employment-sponsored categories; and 55,000 for diversity visas. Due to COVID-19 and the curtailing of immigration operations both abroad at U.S. embassies and consulates, and at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), only a fraction of these visa allocations were used in fiscal year 2020 or will be used by the end of the current 2021 fiscal year which concludes in October."

Essentially, MENG would take away any FB spillover into EB for the current and next fiscal years. All we get is the 5/10% EB visas that were wasted in 2020 and a preservation of any unused visas from 2021's annual quota of 140K. Now, please don't argue how will they restore to FB visas from 2020 that have been allocated and will be used up by EB this year. Plainly, USCIS is carefully working to ensure that not even 140K EB visas are issued this year.

---

When is the bill with this amendment expected to pass? I am asking as Charlie mentioned he will know the numbers in Nov.I am wondering if it passed after Oct 2021, how will they change the numbers already assigned to EB category.It will surely be a messy process

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by may2011

When is the bill with this amendment expected to pass? I am asking as Charlie mentioned he will know the numbers in Nov.I am wondering if it passed after Oct 2021, how will they change the numbers already assigned to EB category.It will surely be a messy process

---

Spec has mentioned this numerous times. Final numerical limits for EB GC i.e any spillover from FB is determined by Nov or Dec. Fiscal year ends on Sep-30th; Numbers from consulates across the world + Field offices + USCIS usage are sent to DHS which then tabulates total usage for a previous fiscal year and if there is leftover then it gets added to current year EB limit. In past such report is published in Nov or sometimes in Dec.

If Charlie is saying he will know FY-22 quota in Nov - I will interpret as any left over FB visa coz of consulate closure + 140k EB visa will determine total EB limit of FY-22 which runs from Oct 1st 2021 to Sep 30th 2022. I highly doubt he is referring to Meng's ammendment when he said final numerical limit for EB GC.

FY21 Numerical Limits - https://travel.state.gov/content/dam...its-FY2021.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monsieur

Spec has mentioned this numerous times. Final numerical limits for EB GC i.e any spillover from FB is determined by Nov or Dec. Fiscal year ends on Sep-30th; Numbers from consulates across the world + Field offices + USCIS usage are sent to DHS which then tabulates total usage for a previous fiscal year and if there is leftover then it gets added to current year EB limit. In past such report is published in Nov or sometimes in Dec.

If Charlie is saying he will know FY-22 quota in Nov - I will interpret as any left over FB visa coz of consulate closure + 140k EB visa will determine total EB limit of FY-22 which runs from Oct 1st 2021 to Sep 30th 2022. I highly doubt he is referring to Meng's ammendment when he said final numerical limit for EB GC.

FY21 Numerical Limits - https://travel.state.gov/content/dam...its-FY2021.pdf

---

Thanks for the info!