Printable View
Q,Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
Is it safe to assume that there are about 700 EB3-I to EB2-I porting in Q1 FY 2011.
10-01-2010 inventory = 24,254
01-05-2011 Inventory = 24,628
Q1 Visa approved ( about 700, assume 50% regular and 50% ported)
======================
Total Porting = 374+350= 724
======================:confused:
How about following formula?
Total Porting = Q1 EB2I Quota + Increase in Inventory in Q1
= 750 + 374 = 1124
That gives us a good sense that for full year total porting is going to be around 4-5K.
Quote:
Originally Posted by veni001
Parvsnath - Your observation is correct that the district/local office demand is now in the inventory thanks to the recent memo.
Spectator – I agree with your observation that the district office demand is still not fully compiled on the inventory yet as you say that it’s early days. To add to that the weather has not been great in many parts of the country which may also contribute to the update not being completed. The next inventory would give an exact picture.
Spec & Q – Spec I believe that EB1 as Q states holds the key for our fortunes. It maybe true for yester years that EB1C used to make up 60% of EB1, while you are correct that negative comments and generalizations keep people from this category away but here we are talking in terms of percentages. Ideally even in the midst of a recession the EB1A and EB1B demand should be the same however even they are coming down. EB1C figures have also been declining I think the whip is being cracked on this fairly hard there was a recent post on Trackitt where it looked like the GC of a USCIS beneficiary was rescinded and the company is under investigation now. However looking at it from another angle not all EB1C filing as is sometimes generalized is fraudulent there are people who have more than 100 reports or manage multimillion USD value project they should get it. I believe the org chart RFE’s are on rise and comparing the EB1C approvals it looks like they are taking 10 months just for I140 which is way higher than any other category that’s is why EB1 inventory is high. All of us have a slightly different interpretation of EB2 row however for EB2 ROW there is some good data available on Trackitt, I do however see an acceleration of EB2 ROW approvals in December. Another reason if I may say for EB1 decline would be if somebody is from ROW it makes no sense to file as EB1 because the yardstick and standards are much higher it makes sense to go through labor filing which is now fairly quick anyway. If you look at Trackitt data looks like almost all the EB1 representation is from India, Trackitt is fairly popular with ROW folks so this skew does indicate something.
I have a question for everybody why are there more EB3 cases in local offices, my understanding is that a case should go to the local office when they want to verify something individually or if somebody has some kind of adverse record. So in this light EB2 and EB3 should be fairly even. The only reason I can think off is that EB2 inventory is less 13 months May 2006 to Jul 2007 so lesser number of people while EB3 is larger. Historically the local offices had the bulk of the 24I cases but the inventory for these cases is low now the only explanation could be that some people filed later for 245I protection. The CP demand yes for 245I will be high as once again FB2 is retrogressed so these individuals will take recourse to I824.
Friends Iam working on my model after plugging in the new inventory, my apologies its taking more, work schedule is busier than usual. However the results should be similar, Iam working to incorporate all the feedback I received from everyone on the forum. Good luck to everybody.
It could be but what about EB3-ROW to EB2-ROW another 4-5K?Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
Great point. I do not know how mcuh for ROW. A gut feel will say may be an equivalent. And I would say may be that is the reason EB2ROW is continuing to show strong new demand. In other words as long as we get a sense of EB2ROW new demand (which it seems is at 28K full year) then we don't really care how much is because of conversions.
For EB2 it matters because porting means EB2I dates progressing slower than they otherwise would.
p.s. - But to answer your question .. I do not know how much ROW conversion might stand at. A gut feel tells me at least 4-5K. Sure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by veni001
Q,Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
I'll take your 1,124 and raise it! Maybe. Perhaps. Sort of. LOL.
I know you are aware how complex this area is, so the following is mainly for the benefit of others.
The EB2-I Inventory did increase by 374 from October to January, but there were also approvals, so the real rise is greater than that.
We could say the rise was 757+374, but I think that overstates it.
What we can say is that reductions in months prior to May 2006 were probably due to approvals, whilst reductions after May 2006 cannot have been approvals since they were not Current.
Removing reductions pre May 2006 gives an adjusted increase in the Inventory of 634, so cases that could either be Porting, new applications or transfer from DO would be 757 + 634 = 1,391 or 5,564 cases for the year.
That figure is for all dates. Probably what is of more interest is how it will affect Cut Off Date movement in FY2011.
On the assumption that EB2-I doesn't move beyond December 2006, this would be 525 cases, so 1,282 per quarter or 5,128 per year.
All the above is on the assumption that the Visa Office used all of the 27% or 757 visas for EB2-I that they are statutorily allowed.
There is some evidence, from data DOS released as part of the EB3 Chinese Class Action Suit, that this is not the case.
Whilst China is shown separately, India is not, so the following figures are for all Countries except China in EB3. I wouldn't expect EB2 to be much different.
In FY2008 the VO used (allocated minus returns) 18.8% of the total visas for the year in Q1.
In FY2009 the VO used 47.8% of the visas in Q1.
In FY2010 (assuming all visas were used) then 36.5% were allocated in Q1.
That gives quite a wide spread. Using those percentages gives the following yearly totals for Porting, new applications and DO transfers up to the end of December 2006:
18.8% - 4,208
27.0% - 5,128
36.5% - 6,192
47.8% - 7,460
Because it is impossible to tell what the VO has done in FY2011, I am going to stick with 27% as the simplest course. That still happens to give a figure that is broadly in line with 4,000 Porting (a little less actually).
Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Q/Spec, I did a kind of month to month compare of the inventory for Eb2-I and C. Looks like porting is happening for India only, the figure for China is down even in the non-current months. Your formula looks reasonable however we should also put in the PWMB and withdrawals and denials which maybe hard to compute. The PWMB should be higher than the withdrawals so this will in fact lower the total and make your calculation look conservative. I still firmly believe that porting will be well within 6K.
Q/Spec,Guys if you look at Trackitt approvals for ROW they are consistently 2009 and 2010 only there is hardly any porting happening here. A reason for EB2 ROW to increase would be that it makes no sense to file in EB1 especially since labor approvals are fast now. However Trackitt trend shows that EB2 ROW is 66% of last year despite everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
Teddy
Since EB3ROW is backlogged just like EB3IC.. it makes sense that there must be some porting going on within ROW from EB3->2.
You are right 2->1 doesn't make sense for ROW.
The question is how big ROW porting is? But another question is why are we asking this question? Because what matters is as long as ROW-EB2 total consumption is reasonably understood ... our purpose is served. So within EB2ROW the split between "pure new EB2 demand vs conversions/porting related demand" is less important.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
Nice to see you back Teddy. I've missed your contribution.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
Yesteryear is all recent years, including FY2009. I agree that it might well have fallen in FY2010, which is why I eagerly await publication of the DHS Yearbook of Immigration Statistics for 2010.
I agree that the quicker time to get through PERM and I-140 means the advantages of EB1 to EB2 are somewhat diminished.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
Nonetheless, ROW still accounted for 65% of approvals in EB1 in FY2009. It will be interesting to see if this has changed in FY2010.
"Fairly popular" is just relative. Trackitt does seem to be the most popular forum for ROW folks, but the predominant population is still Indian.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
I think your explanation is probably correct. On sheer weight of numbers, there should be more EB3 than EB2 cases, but not almost exclusively.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
As you said, 245i has been a reason and that would probably favor an EB3 bias.
Since EB2-ROW has always been Current, I guess that any interviews deemed necessary are conducted very quickly (well, quick by USCIS standards anyway :))
I'm looking forward to the results.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
Spec all replies Inline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Q,Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
I am saying that my figures include PWMB, so 5,500 would represent 4,000 Porting to me. There is no way to tell whether an addition is due to a Porting case or whether it is a new derivative application. Either way, it adds one case.
Other than when the figure has reduced after May 2006, I don't have any clue how to derive a figure for denials / withdrawals. Even that has limitations, because the figures are net and we don't know how they were derived. I think denial of I-485 should be quite low, but I have no idea what the withdrawal rate might be.
You are correct that denials / withdrawals not already incorporated in the Inventory, would lower my figure.
At the moment, I am thinking that it is only one quarter of data, withdrawals are completely unknown, so perhaps leave the figure alone as representing Porting and PWMB.
I fully agree with you Q there is not much of a purpose in deducing the ROW porting as long as we can tag and have a ball park for ROW consumption as a whole. However looking at Trackitt I hardly find any case of ROW porting mostly its 2009 or 2010, ROW seems to be reasonable shape and most folks from even 2006 are expecting to make it this year, EB3 ROW crossing Marc 2005 is actually a big milestone. The situation unfortunately for EB3-I is simply terrible. Another factor that I will say is most ROW guys unlike from India are full time and not consulting (Iam also one of them) its hard looks like to convince the company to file a new case and theer is lot of hierarch and red tape to trudge through. IMHO ROW porting should be really less than 1000 that’s my guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Spec, a much simpler way that I would like to say would be 3 months of consumption has happened for EB2 I/C this would be ~ 1400. Notice China is moving nicely. SOFAD effectively consumed then is 1400. However out of 6000 allocated to porting ~ 1500 has happened but not all cases have seen approvals. If you keep looking at the new inventory every time we can implicitly overcome new demand, porting etc it may not be exact though but the difference will not cause a deviation of more than 1 month to the final outcome.
Teddy, I think one reason (not the only one) could be that EB3 naturally tends to create more backlog. Now the whole service center philosophy is not so new ...however there are significant cases from pre-service center era where the EB3 dates were so retrogressed that field offices never bothered to report them all to USCIS. Neither USCIS ever thought that it was their mandate to establish full visibility to all cases. Then came the rule of horizontal spillover or fall-across which has now further made the situation worse for EB3. I think these things have contributed to creation of dark demand for EB3 at field offices. ME too believe that EB2 has virtually no dark demand whatsoever.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
Spec this is quite ANAL!! But that's ok. I guess what I can't digest is your statement that "there were also approvals." . Remember for EB2I since new demand is zero, my formula works perfect to determine portings (save any withdrawals or denials as Teddy pointed out). Its immaterial what year the approvals came from since nothing new is being added to the backlog as far as EB2I is concerned.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Teddy very good point about withdrawals denials and PWBM. I think this 4-6K we are calculating ... we can call it as a bucket that consists of all adjustments over an above teh base inventory published on 1st Oct. And then we apply this adjustment to any SOFAD received. We don't necessarily need to split hair between how much could be withdrawls pwbm or denials.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
Well ... that observation only confirms that total ROW demand is steady. One reason it could be steady could be because ROW portings are offseting any decrease in ROW new demand (just as an example). That's why I am saying that gauging ROW portings is difficult but more importantly not such a critical thing to understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
I think pretty much exactly the same, which is comforting.Quote:
There was an AILA report which we can assume as accurate it said EB2-I got 20K and EB2-C got 6.5K. Now remove 6K from this because its their individual quota for the year. nother report said EB5=7K. So what is left is 13.5K that will have to be spilit between EB2 ROW and EB2. Since EB1 in 2009 not only consumed its own cap but ate in EB5 I assume EB2 ROW was the one that gave us more. For all my calculations based on my gut feeling I say that EB2 ROW = 10K and EB1 = 3.5K.
Relying on Trackitt data gave EB2-ROW (not including Mexico & Philippines) 24.6k. That meant ROW contributed 6.4k. Mexico & Philippines have traditionally contributed around 3k from their 6k allocation.
From the document I saw, EB5 only had 1.9k approvals, so contributed 8.8k.
China and India contributed their own combined figure of 6k.
That gives SOFAD so far of 6.4 + 3.0 + 8.8 + 6.0 = 24.2k
By process of elimination EB1 would have contributed 2.3k to make up the 26.5k total SOFAD. That implies EB1 approvals were 40.8k in FY2010.
We are on the same page! You said exactly what I have in mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Teddy ... you probably are already assuming it ... but just wanted to point it out that 6K you arereferring to will arrive over full year rather than in one go at the beginning of the year.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
Q thats what I intended to say 6K is the annual figure and since a quarter has passed 1500 has already happened partly it will be approvals and partly visible in the inventory, we are on the same page.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
Q,Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
Not at all. I probably didn't explain it very well.
The 374 increase is the net effect of all the months in the Inventory between Oct and January. Some have risen and some have fallen.
Clearly if there is a rise in the number of cases in a particular month, they are new cases. I don't think we disagree on that.
In months where the figure has fallen, it could be due to one of 2 reasons - either it was a withdrawal/denial or it was due to an approval.
If it was due to an approval, then that number should not be deducted from the number of new cases, since that is expected in the 3 months that have passed.
Say we have 3 months that were Current in October-Dec 2010 and the change in those months between the Inventories was :
100 --- (200) --- 300
The number of NEW cases is NOT 100 - 200 + 300 = 200
It is 100 + 300 = 400
The (200) represents removal of EXISTING cases, not a reduction in NEW cases.
It COULD have been a withdrawal, but we can't tell. On the balance of probability, if the date was Current, it was an approval. If the date wasn't Current, it must have been a withdrawal.
I don't think I can explain it any better than that.
I didn't take offence! I am probably guilty as charged! :D
Teddy,Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
Sorry, you've lost me there.
Where did the 1,400 come from?
2800 (EB2-I) + 2800 (EB2-C) * 25/100 (1 Quarter) = 1400.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Month-Year India China PWMB CP "Total
Monthly" "Cumlative
Sum
"
Offset 8500 1000 0 0 9500 9500
May-06 1110 38 100 100 1348 10848
Jun-06 1696 541 100 100 2437 13285
Jul-06 1505 620 100 100 2325 15610
Aug-06 1677 693 100 100 2570 18180
Sep-06 1745 773 100 100 2718 20898
Oct-06 1747 732 100 100 2679 23577
Nov-06 1737 667 100 100 2604 26181
Dec-06 1881 770 200 100 2951 29132
Jan-07 1540 654 200 100 2494 31626
Feb-07 1444 615 200 100 2359 33985
Mar-07 1404 682 200 100 2386 36371
Apr-07 1420 609 200 100 2329 38700
May-07 1070 519 500 100 2189 40889
Jun-07 1272 558 1000 100 2930 43819
Jul-07 1673 1788 2000 100 5561 49380
- In the table above the columns India and china represent the monthly figures from the Jan 2011 Inventory.
- I have assumed a starting offset of 2000 as there were cases which did not see approval last year even though they were current. I have assumed PD porting to be 6000 (Double of what was calculated last year for India). PD porting has now been added to the offset point itself as we will see movement only in the last quarter and I believe that the date won’t cross May 2006 before the last quarter in the absence of any kind of spillover (SOFAD). The offset also includes ~ 750 approvals each for India & China.
- PWMB refers to those who could not file for their 485’s as the labor approval was missed out or they are adding dependants now. These values are by my gut feeling another point to note is that the PWMB demand especially from May 2007 maybe felt only when the dates reach that point, so ~3500 lesser SOFAD maybe required for the dates to actually move forward if the inventory is the baseline.
- The total monthly is the extrapolated total for the month and cumulative sum is the cumulative figure. Now if someone is interested in finding out that what point we will reach in Sep 2011 they should put their figure of SOFAD and see the resting point.
- Some known facts are a) Total 2010 SOFAD - 26.5K (AILA Report). b) EB5 - 7.5K From reliable published reports. c) India & China Annual Cap - 6K. For this year FB spillover has been assumed to be 0. Effectively SOFAD from EB2 ROW and EB1 = 26.5 - 7.5 - 6 = 13K. For the rest of the calculations I assume that probably 10K came from EB2 ROW and 3.5K came from EB1. Adjustment for NO FB this Year = -6.5K.
Nett SOFAD from EB2 ROW and EB1 without FB would be 13K - 6.5K = 6.5K
Now lets analyze on Trackitt to see the trend for October to December
Year 2009 (Oct to Dec)
EB2 ROW - 190
EB2 NIW - 27
Total - 207
EB1A - 46
EB1B - 87
EB1C - 63
Total - 196
Year 2010 (Oct to Dec)
EB2 ROW - 122
EB2 NIW - 13
Total - 135
EB1A - 16
EB1B - 18
EB1B - 19
Total - 53
The drop in EB1 appears to be really drastic however I feel it is not being adequately represented.
However looks like the EB1 consumption could drop this year compared to last year though. If the EB1
Consumption actually drops to 50% of last year then this could provide ~ 15K SOFAD this year.
Consumption last year = 43000 - 3500 = 39500.
If we assume a drop of 25% (Extremely conservative) the consumption will be 29625
However this year we are back to the regular cap so SOFAD = 40320-26925 ~ 11K
If we assume a drop of 50% (Extremely Optimistic) the consumption will be 19750
However this year we are back to the regular cap so SOFAD = 40320-19750 ~ 20K
For the conservative calculation let’s just go ahead with 11K.
For EB2 the data appears to be good.
EB2 ROW consumption last year = 40320 - 6000 - 10000 = 24320.
Now the trend shows that the consumption is (135/207) * 24320 ~ 16K.
So potential SOFAD out of EB2 ROW will be 34K - 16K ~ 18K.
EB5 SOFAD I expect will decline from 7K to 5K.
Hence total SOFAD that we can expect in 2011 = 11 + 18 + 5 = 34K.
With ~ 24 K SOFAD we may reach Mid March 2007. Now lets look at all possible scenario’s.
Worst possible case is that we have 26.5K SOFAd just like last year, this will put us at 01-JAN02007.
Best case scenario is EB1 gives us an extra 10K and the PWMB demand will be felt only when the dates cross May 2007 so kind of add 13K on top of the 34K this can actually help to throw us over the fence finally to 01-AUG-2007, this again is extremely optimistic but not impossible. We just have to continue monitoring for more time.
However for now I would like to stick with the final range as Feb – Apr 2007 in Sep 2011 for EB2-I staying conservative.
EB3 –I is also showing good movement Apr-May 2002 seems to be in sight and EB3 ROW seems to be set to move to Mid 2006 as well.
Spec yes the logic is right. But i guess for EB2I, since EB2I is not current there are no new 485 coming into system other than conversions. (Granted PWMB is a possibility but a remote one since PWMB horizon starts sometime in 2007 as PERM approvals were coming in on time during early 2007) and right now the date is May 06. Does that make sense?
And so I would imagine any increase in inventory plus Q1 quota is a fairly accurate estimate of conversions (save any miniscule denials withdrawals etc).
p.s. Oops now i am seeing the light. u mean that some conversions may relate to a date post may-06 and so conversions may be understated by my formula? Right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Teddy, you are way overly optimistic about EB2 ROW. Please have a look at
http://www.sewashree.com/forums/show...&p=371#post371
and the post before that.
Quoting Q's take from that post:
8K ROW PERM approvals in last 4 months translate to 24K approvals for full year. Of which 12K are EB2ROW. Which translate to 26K EB2ROW 485s for full year approvals - which means about 8K SOFAD to IC (given MP are already in the PERM approvals). Even otherwise MP have low EB2 demand and whatever demand they have would be offset by possible rejections/withdrawals within the ROW labor going to 140 and 485 stages.
Thanks!
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu