Huh? How would this happen? How would EB3 receive SOFAD if EB2IC and EB2ROW were not current? I don't understand...Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
Printable View
Huh? How would this happen? How would EB3 receive SOFAD if EB2IC and EB2ROW were not current? I don't understand...Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
Its a typo. Please read "EB3IC are not going to get "Quote:
Originally Posted by abcx13
The essence is,
Spillover to EB3 ---->EB3ROW----->EB3ROW NIL------> EB3IC
Spillover to EB2 ---->EB2ROW----->EB2ROW NIL------> EB2IC
Currently EB3 has no potential spillover possibility, so if any amendment is passed, and the spillover rule is changed, the distribution would be like as mentioned above.
There are 23,975 EB2-I cases (as per DD) pending before Jan-1-2009 plus lots of porting cases.
If 18K visas are available from spill over, prediction on dates might move to early 2009 is 100% not possible.
I feel dates will not move beyond July 2008.
I am not a expert on this, Please correct me If I am wrong ?
Note: We should have DD by month/year. (:--
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanmani
With so many unknown factors, my honest opinion is not to come to any conclusion at this point of time. Lets hope for the best!Quote:
Originally Posted by edisonguy
edisonguy,Quote:
Originally Posted by edisonguy
Unless many earlier PD cases are "left behind", I don't see Cut Off Dates progressing into 2009.
Unless the update to the article is momentous, I didn't see anything in it to alter my thinking.
I've been struggling to properly convey the numbers. I'll have one more go and leave it at that. Please don't get hung up on the exact numbers - it is an example within a range (possibly quite a wide one).
a) 18,000 extra visas for EB have been announced.
b) Of those, 5,148 will be made available to EB3 and cannot be used towards spillover. That leaves 12,852 extra visas that could Fall Down or Fall Across to EB2-I. I say EB2-I because I don't believe EB2-C will benefit from any of the extra visas.
c) EB2-WW used 25,009 visas last year. Had they not been retrogressed, they might have reached 32,000. That means there are 6,991 visas to flow through into FY2013 above the normal EB2-WW run rate.
d) The allocation for EB2-WW in FY2013 is 38,862. That is 6,862 higher than the 32,000 normal run rate they might use. The figure is so close to the extra number flowing from FY20112 to 2013, we can say that EB2-WW would use their entire new allocation and not provide Fall Across to EB2-I.
e) The EB2-WW share of the 12,862 visas above is 4,427. That leaves a balance of 8,425 extra visas available to EB2-I.
f) Currently, I am using a figure of 35k usage in EB1, 8k in EB4 and 10k in EB5. That provides an extra 5,000, 2,000 and zero visas to EB2-I had there been no extra FB visas.
g) The total spillover to EB2-I becomes 8,425 + 5,000 + 2,000 = 15,425 spillover visas.
h) Adding the normal allocation of 2,803 gives total visa available to EB2-I of 15,425 + 2,803 = 17,868. EB2-C receives 3,163 visas for SOFAD of 21,031.
As a table, this becomes
There are ------------- 18,000 - extra visas
Less -------------------(5,148)- to EB3
To EB2 ---------------- 12,852
Used by EB2-WW ---------(4,427)
Available for EB2-IC --- 8,425 - as spillover/increased allocation from extra FB visas
Normal SO from EB1 ----- 5,000 - Based on 35k usage of normal allocation
Normal SO from EB4 ----- 2,000 - Based on 8k usage of normal allocation
Normal SO from EB5 --------- 0 - Based on 10k usage of normal allocation
Total to EB2-IC ------- 15,425
Add Normal allocation -- 5,606
SOFAD EB2-IC ---------- 21,031
Total to EB2-C --------- 3,163
Total to EB2-I -------- 17,868
SOFAD ----------------- 21,031
or, if EB2-C receives 7% of any Fall Down from EB1 (as the INA appears to allow):
Total to EB2-C --------- 4,192
Total to EB2-I -------- 16,838
SOFAD ----------------- 21,031
I will reiterate again this is a simplified example of my current thinking. It evolves as more information becomes available. In fact, I've thrown it together so quickly, I have almost certainly left something out.
Feel free to plug in your own assumptions.
My immediate reaction is
1) porting will consume 3k of that 21k and
2) those are conservative spillover numbers.
I expect around 20k for EB2I. But really it's a lot of guess work at this point. At the end of the day, I expect dates to move to at least the end of Sept 2008.
vizcard,Quote:
Originally Posted by vizcard
I think 20k is a reasonable number.
I did ask people not to get hung up by the exact numbers used in the calculation. It is meant to be more generic than that. I think it illustrates more that people should not expect 30k or 40k for EB2-I, unless something extremely unusual (and outside my comprehension) happens.
As for spillover, EB4 used 7.5k last year. I don't see that decreasing and the backlog of I-360 cases is now quite large.
For EB5, no likely retrogression for EB5-C is a good sign, but it is still likely to approach full usage. EB5 used 7.6k last year and they also have a very large backlog of I-526 cases. EB5 is going through a tricky period at the moment, but I expect that to be resolved before year end.
EB1 is probably the trickiest to call. My estimate is little more than the half way point between approvals in FY2011 and FY2012 and increased approvals within EB1-I can probably fill that gap. We'll see.
I guess the AILA posting that you are asking about is this one. Found it on Ron Gotcher's forum today where a forum member posted it.Quote:
Originally Posted by edisonguy
http://www.lawbench.com/immigration-...backlog-issues
There was supposedly another meeting yesterday. It's referenced on the AILA site but its for "members only". The content could very well be the same as your link.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonty Rhodes
That was a typo. Thanks Kanmani for identifying.Quote:
Originally Posted by abcx13
Spec,Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator;33260[B
Looking at the difference in inventory data between 10/1/12 and 1/3/13 for EB2ROW, it appears that around 7k visas have been issued in Q1, which matches with the figures mentioned in C. Here is the current USCIS EB2 inventory as on 1/3/13:
ROW: 13362
Mexico : 551
Phillipines: 1512
Total: 15425
Assuming 10% cases will be delayed, so approvable cases will be around 14k. This added to the already approved cases becomes around 21k visas.
In order for EB2ROW/M/P to reach 38862, USCIS would need to receive about 18k applications between Jan and May and approve them by September, assuming
I485's filed beyond May won't be approved in this year. Do think that USCIS will receive and receive about 3600 per month from Jan to May? I did not see such high EB2ROW demand in the last few years inventory data.
The amount of data and knowledge of people in this forum is amazing. Thanks of all the information and analysis.
What is stopping the controller from moving the dates forward as half year is almost passed and he got 18K additional visas?
bandoayan,Quote:
Originally Posted by bandoayan
The USCIS Inventory only captures data for cases where the underlying I-140 has been approved. Many Concurrent Filed cases are probably never captured in the USCIS Inventory.
For Categories (such as EB1) and Groups (such as EB2-ROW) that are generally Current, it does not capture the full numbers. The 7k only represents clearing the numbers that built up during retrogression, but they are not the only approvals for EB2-ROW. If you don't believe me, try using the Inventory for a previous full year (say FY2011) to match the actual numbers approved (30.2k). The Corresponding number for EB2-WW (EB2-ROW-M-P) is 34.6k.
For Q1, I would estimate (from historical Trackitt data) that EB2-WW used something over 13k (of which EB2-ROW was something over 11k). That is much more in line with also having to clear the accumulated cases due to retrogression in FY2012. It is also in line with all overall EB visas available in Q1 being used.
Currently, EB2-WW appears to somewhere over the 20k mark. Even now, it appears that about 20% of cases received by USCIS in June 2012 and 40% of those received in Oct/Nov 2012 still await approval.
Since USCIS seem to be approving a lot of cases in about 4 months, we are still some way from seeing the last of the cases that might still be approved in FY2013.
EB2-WW averaged 2.8k approvals per month in FY2012 and 2.9k approvals per month in FY2011. Even if monthly approvals for EB2-WW drop to 85% of their FY2012 levels going forward, EB2-WW will still reach their revised FY2013 allocation.
Even if I am overestimating the current number, that is enough "wiggle room" for it to still happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
What is button line here?
indian1975,Quote:
Originally Posted by indian1975
That I don't expect any Fall Across from EB2-WW to EB2-I.
EB2I or EB3-I ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
edisonguy,Quote:
Originally Posted by edisonguy
Unused visas can (where allowed) either:
a) Fall Up from a lower Category to a higher Category e.g. Visas can Fall Up from EB4 and EB5 to EB1.
b) Fall Down from a higher Category to a lower Category e.g. Visas can Fall Down from EB1 to EB2 or from EB2 to EB3.
c) Fall Across within the same Category e.g. EB2-ROW to EB2-I.
So, by definition, the statement is talking about movement from EB2-WW to EB2-I.
You may also have seen the term SOFAD. This stands for Spill Over Fall Across (and) Down. In addition it also includes the normal allocation, so it represents the total number of visas from All sources.
Kudos for such a patient response. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Spec,Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
As per the trackitt data, EB2-WW approvals FY2013 are higher than that of in the previous years', but it was because of the clearance of stagnation caused by the overallocation .
So far the EB2 EB2-WW perm approvals seem to be on the lower side , assuming atleast 30% of the 2012 perm approvals fall into 2013 account.
Your calculation of Zero fall across numbers to EB2IC directly call for retrogression of EB2-WW at the end of FY2013 assuming no FB numbers available.
In the recent past the thought process of zero FA was ok , now I am of a different opinion .
What do you think?
Kanmani,Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanmani
That is effectively what I am saying.
If, for example, there were 2.8k approvals / month for EB2-WW normally and 7k retrogression backlog to clear, that would be (2.8k * 5) + 7 = 21k to date which is about where we seem to be.
The allocation for EB2-WW, including the extra FB visas, is 38.7k. To reach that would require a further 17.7k over 7 months, which is a continuing average monthly rate of about 2.5k per month. I think that is entirely possible for EB2-WW.
I think that is a little on the low side. EB2-WW PERM certifications in FY2012 only covered slightly past June 2012 PD, so I think a figure of 45% would be more appropriate.Quote:
So far the EB2 EB2-WW perm approvals seem to be on the lower side , assuming at least 30% of the 2012 perm approvals fall into 2013 account.
To be picky :) , exactly zero Fall Across would not result in retrogression of EB2-WW since there would be sufficient visas available. FB visas are available, so I don't understand that comment.Quote:
Your calculation of Zero fall across numbers to EB2IC directly call for retrogression of EB2-WW at the end of FY2013 assuming no FB numbers available.
If EB2-WW need more visas, they are still not likely to retrogress, since they would then begin to consume Fall Down visas which would otherwise have been available to EB2-I. Only if that supply becomes exhausted would there be a need to retrogress EB2-WW.
Sorry, I'm not entirely sure what you mean.Quote:
In the recent past the thought process of zero FA was ok , now I am of a different opinion .
What do you think?
Spec thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
With so much of information provided by you, I stopped scribbling numbers long back, whenever I go through your calculations , I am always hearing a buzz in my head, which was the reason for my confused post above. You are doing way too much to follow. (This is of course a compliment :) )
here is full article that AILA mentioned, this happened before FB numbers update it has exact same information mentioned in March VB
http://www.cilawgroup.com/news/2013/...february-2013/
As usual some notes from CO which has no logic.
EB-2 India.** Very little, if any, movement expected in the short term due to upgrades (porting of priority date) from EB-3 India to EB-2 India.** According to Mr. Oppenheim, in December 2012 alone, India EB-2 had 125 cases approved that were from 2003 or earlier. * Considering the current 2004 cutoff dates, EB-2 India could easily reach the annual limit — an indication that any forward movement is extremely unlikely. * Possible good news is the possibility of certain “fall down”* from EB-1 (numbers are not known at this point) to allow for more numbers to be used for EB-2 India.** “Fall down” refers to taking numbers from one category which may remain unused (EB-1) and allocating t another category which has a high demand (EB-2 India, for example).**** Current numbers indicate that there are approximately 42,000 EB-2 India cases in line with priority dates prior to May 2010.
EB-2 Rest of World (ROW).* This category is expected to remain current throughout the fiscal year; however, Mr. Oppenheim suggested that depending on demand he may introduce a cutoff date towards the end of the fiscal year, not unlike what happened during the summer of 2012.
Kanmani,Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanmani
That buzz is normal. I usually get a headache. :)
I don't expect people to necessarily agree - I think it is a good thing for statements / predictions / hypotheses to be questioned.
Thanks for the compliment. I know you read everything very thoroughly and have a very good grasp of what is going on.
The only article I have seen that mentioned a figure said that a total of 13k visas might be available to EB2-IC in FY2013.
That was pre the FB visas news. If EB2-WW use their extra visas and EB1, EB4 and EB5 extra visas eventually Fall Down to EB2 as well as the extra that EB2-IC receive directly because the 7% limit calculation, that is an extra 8.4k available to EB2-IC.
The adjusted figure would become 21.4k. Since EB2-C would use 4.1k, that would be 17.3k available to EB2-I.
That isn't really any different from what I am saying.
I understood. Fall down from EB1 is not just from EB1, it is the consolidated figure from EB4----->EB5------>EB1------->EB2ROW-------> EB2IC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Justified!
From the above exchange, I'm sure some people (not Kanmani) will be asking why, if there are 18,000 extra FB visas, EB2-IC might only receive 8,425 of them. It's a big difference.
Here's how the 18,000 are distributed across the Categories and what falls to EB2-IC if EB2-WW provide no Fall Across within EB2.
Category -- From FB -- To EB2-IC
EB1 --------- 5,148 -----> 5,148
EB2-C --------- 360 -------> 360
EB2-I --------- 360 -------> 360
EB2-M --------- 360 ---------> 0
EB2-P --------- 360 ---------> 0
EB2-ROW ----- 3,708 ---------> 0
EB3 --------- 5,148 ---------> 0
EB4 --------- 1,278 -----> 1,278
EB5 --------- 1,278 -----> 1,278
Total ------ 18,000 -----> 8,425
If the full Fall Across from EB2-WW were available, the figure increases to 12,852.
Why would CO say such a thing despite knowing the fact that there are extra 18K visas from FB? :confused:
Quote:
Originally Posted by openaccount
@Spec
Can you please give the best Range you think the dates would end up by Sept 2013 - for all the possibilities of the numbers you had crunched in?
Would it be - May - 2008 - Sept 2008?
thanks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
CleanSock,Quote:
Originally Posted by CleanSock
Since the meeting pre-dates the announcement of the extra FB visas, I think we have to assume that the comments relate to a situation where only 140k were available and are based on that assumption (even if privately CO had knowledge of the FB numbers).
In that situation, EB2-WW would only have about 34k visa available to them. With that number it was not entirely impossible for the EB2-WW demand in FY2013 to exceed 34k plus any Fall Down available from EB1. If that were the case, EB2-WW would have to be retrogressed and EB2-IC would have essentially received no spillover at all.
With the extra 18k FB visa announcement, it becomes virtually impossible for EB2-WW to retrogress.
If EB2-WW usage is particularly high, then it could begin to impact the number of Fall Down visas available to EB2-I.
The other scenario that would necessitate EB2-WW retrogression is if CO allocates too many visas, too early, to EB2-IC, as he did last year, leaving too few for the actual EB2-WW demand in FY2013.
I don't think that is going to happen.
Spec.
One thing that I can not quite follow is that being current despite clearing last years backlog (assuming that it is cleared by monthly quota and not borrowed from future) how EB2 WW can consume all their own and also extra from FB spill?,given that EB2 WW inventory in January 2013 is only 13,385 ( frankly I do not know the inventory as of now? which might explain somewhat ) and next few months applications might not be easily converted into demand ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Gurus have listed their predictions on 1st page. I am not a guru but will try my best to answer based on what I have been following on this thread.
Based on Spec's earlier analysis, looks like we will be getting approx. 21K SOFAD/Spillover (as he mentioned don't hung up on exact numbers). If we consider this number, from I-485 pending inventory data and March demand data, there is approximately,
- 22 k demand by end of Sep 2008 for IC
- 24 k demand by end of Oct 2008 for IC
So, based on how much buffer CO wants, dates can move anywhere between Sep 2008 - Dec 2008 by end of FY 2013, i.e., Sep 2013. Hope this helps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeekingGC2013
My last on the subject for a while.
SeekingGC2013,Quote:
Originally Posted by SeekingGC2013
Some people get annoyed when I switch from Calculation Mode to Prediction Mode.
All I will say is that range is not unrealistic.
dreamer,Quote:
Originally Posted by dreamer
Remember that those figures do not include any approvals in the first 4 months of FY2013 for EB2-IC or any future approvals that are not already part of the Demand Data. The other part we don't know is what % of pending cases will actually be approved, other than it probably won't be 100%.
http://www.cilawgroup.com/topics/news/
Multiple lawyers have started putting the 22nd AILA meeting details out on their webpage. Food for thought.
Yes. But they are definitely the information before FB Spill over news. They might have posted same notes today. If you think based on numbers available, there will be definitely big forward movement in Q4. Let's hope for the best.Quote:
Originally Posted by idiotic
The USCIS Dashboard figures have been updated with the December 2012 figures.
Thank You Spec! That explains it all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Hi
I am new to this forum and amazed at the amount of calculations etc that are used in this forum. My priority date is similar to what gkjppp had. What is the probability of early 2010 becoming current in the next financial year (2014) ?
if current trend continuous for next couple of years without immigration reform, its unlikely to be current. with FB spillover we may or maynot reach sep'2008 this year. again there must be retro during start of next fiscal year to takecare of porting etc. it needs almost 25k+ visas for 2014 to see light for us.Spec has already explained with data.
Quote:
Originally Posted by incredible
gkjppp,Quote:
Originally Posted by gkjppp
Unfortunately, I agree with your prognosis.
With porting over 2 years, it probably requires close to 45k EB2-I approvals for EB2-I to reach the end of 2009. Then it requires about 1k per month within 2010 according to the current figures.
Including EB2-C that translates into more than 50k SOFAD across FY2013 and FY2014 just to reach 2010.
That is probably a tough ask.
Spectator.
I completely agree with you. Its hard to accurately predict and read whats on CO's mind. I was just trying to explain by taking spillover numbers as constant, which itself is highly variable number.
Last but not least, I really admire your contribution to the immigration community and like you number crunching/analysis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
With sequestration i.e reduction in USCIS budget and potential reduction in personnel coming up do we have to adjust the prediction? Do we have to account for less number of GCs being issued? How about the loss of 3-5K ? I know this variable is unknown and is completely a what if scenario but still I thought of floating the idea around.