EB2 Predictions (Rather Calculations) - 2012

That is what.....i just posted so that GURUS can enlighten me...i myself feel it is wrong( atleast i dont think people will fake there deatisl) but i myself started to know details about GC more for last one year....so i dont know much about previous years and top of it......i dont decode much from trackitt cases( as still i dont know exact parameters and i dont take that pain may be)....just wanted to know whether there were any issues of this kind in trackitt data before....


As such i dont beilive lawyers site much...but i do read them for information sake( menat murthy, ron &oh law firm)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kanmani

mesan sis, do you know what numbers he has posted in contradiction to trackitt?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gc_usa

Two things I learned from this GC process. Doc who hates online / web ( One of doc I went to ask for Medical cost for Immi and it was small practice and spoke to him directly , of course Desi...) stuff must have bad review and mal practice information on web.

And lawyer who is all across internet may be don't have business to do and know less in actual INS text. Not advertising here but law firm which I worked with for my app is very small and no website , but lawyer made sure each and every detail about BC and other docs. He was so picky about BC that I had to spend much time on preparing docs. He told me that many cases get RFE on BC which he wanted to prevent. There are few lawyers who post information left and right and they know lot about what is going on web so may be they have nothing to do :)

---

I sorta agree with your second para. My lawyer informed me about all the vaccinations we need to take and asked to get the shots done when we started the GC process, even before filing the PERM. They asked for prior Indian employment info., BC copies etc. which are required for I-140 and 485, when they started the process. Of course it takes 4-5 years for us. But for ROW, it will help reduce their wait time if all these info/ docs are ready right away. From what I hear, not many lawyers do that.

I have been a silent follower of this blog for the last couple of months and am really impressed with the overall level of insight, knowledge and caliber of the members (special shout out to Spec, Teddy, Q, Nishant, Kanmani , KD, imdeng and apologies for missing out others... don't want the list to run in pages). The information and the quick response time on the blog are amazing. Ironically, it is a dismal sign about the state of immigration affairs in US that an average person has to educate oneself so much to not trip the million hurdles on way to GC.

I wanted to discuss a few hypothesis/ questions which come to mind after the recent run-up in EB2 (I&C) category and the permanent lack of quality data from government agencies. I assume that CP (approx. 3 months processing time) would allow a number of EB2 (I&C) Jan filers (PD prior to 1/1/2009) to get GC in March/ April due to no retrogression in March (and maybe even April). I am sure that CO is well aware of this difference in USCIS and CP processing time.
a. If the dates do retrogress back to say July 2008 in the summer of 2012, how does DoS/ DHS justify issuance of GC to person with PD of Dec 2008 through CP but no GC for PD of July 2008 through AoS even though there was no delay in filing or lack of paperwork by the July 2008 AoS applicant? Does such an applicant (July 2008 AoS) have any legal recourse since such a person has been wrongfully denied GC while someone with later PD gets GC? To minimize such legal risk and create an alibi, can we expect RFE from USCIS for cases that are after the retrogressed date?
b. Does this mean that dates have to retrogress starting April (and not summer 2012 as widely expected right now) to avoid the situation in (a) above?
c. Alternatively, if the April bulletin does not retrogress, is it safe to assume that retrogression will be much closer to Jan 1, 2009 (cut-off date of Jan VB)?

Vikrant, thanks for the shout out and welcome to the forum.

My opinions are inline below.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikrant

I have been a silent follower of this blog for the last couple of months and am really impressed with the overall level of insight, knowledge and caliber of the members (special shout out to Spec, Teddy, Q, Nishant, Kanmani , KD, imdeng and apologies for missing out others... don't want the list to run in pages). The information and the quick response time on the blog are amazing. Ironically, it is a dismal sign about the state of immigration affairs in US that an average person has to educate oneself so much to not trip the million hurdles on way to GC.

I wanted to discuss a few hypothesis/ questions which come to mind after the recent run-up in EB2 (I&C) category and the permanent lack of quality data from government agencies. I assume that CP (approx. 3 months processing time) would allow a number of EB2 (I&C) Jan filers (PD prior to 1/1/2009) to get GC in March/ April due to no retrogression in March (and maybe even April). I am sure that CO is well aware of this difference in USCIS and CP processing time.
a. If the dates do retrogress back to say July 2008 in the summer of 2012, how does DoS/ DHS justify issuance of GC to person with PD of Dec 2008 through CP but no GC for PD of July 2008 through AoS even though there was no delay in filing or lack of paperwork by the July 2008 AoS applicant? Does such an applicant (July 2008 AoS) have any legal recourse since such a person has been wrongfully denied GC while someone with later PD gets GC? To minimize such legal risk and create an alibi, can we expect RFE from USCIS for cases that are after the retrogressed date?

There is no law that requires USCIS to process a case in certain time frame at all. They can take years if they wish. Of course, their lack of timeliness has repercussion for them. The inspector general, or Ombudsman will call upon them, and eventually the Congress may act or may choose to ignore it. So we do not have any recourse. It is the way the system has been setup. DoS has a legal burden to use up all of the annual quota of visas but even then there is no reprimand if they don't. So at best we can hope for is DoS using up all of the annual quota. Also there is no law that says, GCs should be handed out in the order of PDs.

b. Does this mean that dates have to retrogress starting April (and not summer 2012 as widely expected right now) to avoid the situation in (a) above?

No, not at all. Dates will only retrogress if USCIS processes and adjudicates more cases than there are visas to be handed out. Hence, DoS and Mr. CO prefers to limit retrogression to the end of the fiscal year if possible. But there might be an unfortunate situation where they have to retrogress immediately. Currently, based on USCIS processing this is unlikely.

c. Alternatively, if the April bulletin does not retrogress, is it safe to assume that retrogression will be much closer to Jan 1, 2009 (cut-off date of Jan VB)?

Again, the cut-off date resulting from retrogression has no relation with when the dates are retrogressed. As I have said before, USCIS does not adjudicate cases in a strict FIFO. The cut-off date could land anywhere depending on which cases USCIS has processed.

---

I doubt that CO/USCIS/DoS are much concerned about the difference in processing time between AoS and CP. Applicants have the choice between the two, they are not forcing anyone to chose between one or the other - so I guess they don't have any liability here or any grounds to be sued.

I also don't believe that here is any coordination between CP folks and AoS folks - so the idea that RFEs will be issed by USCIS in reaction to anything being does by CP people does not seem credible.

Now, where retrogression will land depends on only one factor - how many visas does USCIS requests from DoS when they start running through Jan VB submissions. In another month or two, Jan VB cases will start becoming ripe and the moment there are enough of them to approach the annual quota, CO will clamp down with retrogression (my guess is for 15-Mar-2008). USCIS will hopefully continue to pre-adjudicate rest of the inventory and in Aug or Sept VB, CO will adjust the retrogressed PD to make sure that no visas are wasted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikrant

a. If the dates do retrogress back to say July 2008 in the summer of 2012, how does DoS/ DHS justify issuance of GC to person with PD of Dec 2008 through CP but no GC for PD of July 2008 through AoS even though there was no delay in filing or lack of paperwork by the July 2008 AoS applicant? Does such an applicant (July 2008 AoS) have any legal recourse since such a person has been wrongfully denied GC while someone with later PD gets GC? To minimize such legal risk and create an alibi, can we expect RFE from USCIS for cases that are after the retrogressed date?
b. Does this mean that dates have to retrogress starting April (and not summer 2012 as widely expected right now) to avoid the situation in (a) above?
c. Alternatively, if the April bulletin does not retrogress, is it safe to assume that retrogression will be much closer to Jan 1, 2009 (cut-off date of Jan VB)?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spectator

My two weekly update on EB2-I Primary applications added to Trackitt since October 2011.

-- VB ------- Priority Dates ---------------- Jan 03 -- Jan 17 -- Jan 31 -- Feb 14
October VB -- PD Apr 15 2007 to Jul 14 2007 --- 100 ----- 107 ----- 113 ----- 125 (+12 cases)
November VB - PD Jul 15 2007 to Oct 31 2007 --- 238 ----- 278 ----- 331 ----- 387 (+56 cases)
December VB - PD Nov 01 2007 to Mar 14 2008 --- 191 ----- 286 ----- 336 ----- 436 (+100 cases)
January VB -- PD Mar 15 2008 to Dec 31 2008 ---- 15 ----- 176 ----- 310 ----- 454 (+144 cases)
February VB - PD Jan 01 2009 to Dec 31 2009 --------------------------------- 199 (+199 cases)

Here are the approvals from those applications.

Approvals by PD Month for FY2012 VB

PD -------------------- Total --- NSC --- TSC --- CSC --- VSC -- % Approved
April 15 2007 - ----------- 7 ----- 1 ----- 6 ----- 0 ----- 0 ------ 58.33%
May 2007 ----------------- 16 ----- 2 ---- 14 ----- 0 ----- 0 ------ 42.11%
June 2007 ---------------- 30 ----- 8 ---- 22 ----- 0 ----- 0 ------ 47.62%
July 2007 ---------------- 20 ----- 3 ---- 17 ----- 0 ----- 0 ------ 31.75%
August 2007 -------------- 24 ---- 14 ---- 10 ----- 0 ----- 0 ------ 25.00%
September 2007 ----------- 23 ---- 14 ----- 9 ----- 0 ----- 0 ------ 19.66%
October 2007 ------------- 37 ---- 21 ---- 15 ----- 1 ----- 0 ------ 30.33%
November 2007 ------------- 1 ----- 0 ----- 1 ----- 0 ----- 0 ------- 1.16%
December 2007 ------------- 3 ----- 3 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ------- 3.33%
January 2008 -------------- 3 ----- 2 ----- 1 ----- 0 ----- 0 ------- 2.73%
February 2008 ------------- 4 ----- 2 ----- 2 ----- 0 ----- 0 ------- 4.12%
March 2008 ---------------- 4 ----- 1 ----- 3 ----- 0 ----- 0 ------- 5.06%
April 2008 ---------------- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ------- 0.00%
May 2008 ------------------ 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ------- 0.00%
June 2008 ----------------- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ------- 0.00%

Post Apr 15 PD Appr. ---- 172 ---- 71 --- 100 ----- 1 ----- 0 ------ 10.74%
Post July PD Approvals --- 99 ---- 57 ---- 41 ----- 1 ----- 0 ------- 6.18%
All Approvals ----------- 181 ---- 75 --- 105 ----- 1 ----- 0 ------ 11.09%


The difference represents applications submitted and approved for cases that were Current in FY2011.

---

Thanks a lot for the detailed analysis. You help us a lot...

I agree with KD.. i think retrogression will happen at late part of summer if it has too...atleast seeing at the DD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kd2008

Vikrant, thanks for the shout out and welcome to the forum.

My opinions are inline below.

---

General question - How frequently does the USCIS ask for visas from DOS. Is it real time or is it in batch (weekly, monthly, etc.) ... if it is real time, then folks who submit earlier will get GC earlier regardless of PD. If its a monthly batch then there is some semblance of sticking to the PD priority.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mesan123

I agree with KD.. i think retrogression will happen at late part of summer if it has too...atleast seeing at the DD

---

by the time retrogression happens, hopefully we cross mid 2008 in 485 approvals and demand destruciton is in our favour.

Hi Everyone,
Congrats to every one who all went current in the March Bulletin. I too went current my PD Feb 2010. I am a quite observer of this forum.
I have a situation with my job, need some advise from the gurus here. My project ends this month and I have to find another contract job soon.
I work for Company A who is filing my GC, so my I 485 application should be filed after Mar 1. Being in between projects will that affect filing my I 485 to uscis.
Should I notify my attorney that my project is ending this month. Should I be in a project when filing my I 485. What are my risks here. I will be working for my company A, it's just my project is ending and have to look for another one. Please advice.

i think it is the the real time...GURUs can correct me if i am wrong....i think it is like whose ever application is processed and approved they will get GC irrsepctive of prior PD date people waiting

Eg: i meant if dates are current till 5/1/2010, if an 2009 priority date person had his case approved he will get GC then people whose application are in processing( may be 2007 & 2008)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vizcard

General question - How frequently does the USCIS ask for visas from DOS. Is it real time or is it in batch (weekly, monthly, etc.) ... if it is real time, then folks who submit earlier will get GC earlier regardless of PD. If its a monthly batch then there is some semblance of sticking to the PD priority.

---

Today afternoon i got a email saying "Card/Document production". I moved from IL to FL last weekend. I forwarded mails from IL to FL address via USPS. I called USCIS and updated the address with them today afternoon after seeing the approval. Also filed AR11 form.

Will the address be updated in their system by the time they mail the cards. I lost my EAD and AP cards in mail because of USPS guys.

Please let me know if i need to do anything else in order to get the cards to the new address.

As i kept mail forwarding i think USPS will filter the mail at the postoffice itself instead of keeping them in the old address.

Gurus any suggestions ?

I did move couple of times in past, I file change of address online in USPS. They charge a dollar but got all the mails forwarded to new address.

I have read in some forum stating that USCIS mails will not be forwarded. Is that true ?

That is true. But the good news is that it is a crime to tamper with or open USCIS mail by anybody other than to whom it is addressed to. So generally the contents should be safe and returned to USCIS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arikepudi

I have read in some forum stating that USCIS mails will not be forwarded. Is that true ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arikepudi

Today afternoon i got a email saying "Card/Document production". I moved from IL to FL last weekend. I forwarded mails from IL to FL address via USPS. I called USCIS and updated the address with them today afternoon after seeing the approval. Also filed AR11 form.

Will the address be updated in their system by the time they mail the cards. I lost my EAD and AP cards in mail because of USPS guys.

Please let me know if i need to do anything else in order to get the cards to the new address.

As i kept mail forwarding i think USPS will filter the mail at the postoffice itself instead of keeping them in the old address.

Gurus any suggestions ?

---

Congrats on the approval!

I think the card is mailed a day or two after you get the approval email. You will also get another email saying that your card has been mailed to you.

Since you updated your address with USCIS as soon as you got your first email, I think it will be mailed to your new address.

Good luck!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kd2008

There is no law that requires USCIS to process a case in certain time frame at all. They can take years if they wish. Of course, their lack of timeliness has repercussion for them. The inspector general, or Ombudsman will call upon them, and eventually the Congress may act or may choose to ignore it. So we do not have any recourse. It is the way the system has been setup. DoS has a legal burden to use up all of the annual quota of visas but even then there is no reprimand if they don't. So at best we can hope for is DoS using up all of the annual quota. Also there is no law that says, GCs should be handed out in the order of PDs.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imdeng

I doubt that CO/USCIS/DoS are much concerned about the difference in processing time between AoS and CP. Applicants have the choice between the two, they are not forcing anyone to chose between one or the other - so I guess they don't have any liability here or any grounds to be sued.

I also don't believe that here is any coordination between CP folks and AoS folks - so the idea that RFEs will be issed by USCIS in reaction to anything being does by CP people does not seem credible.

Now, where retrogression will land depends on only one factor - how many visas does USCIS requests from DoS when they start running through Jan VB submissions. In another month or two, Jan VB cases will start becoming ripe and the moment there are enough of them to approach the annual quota, CO will clamp down with retrogression (my guess is for 15-Mar-2008). USCIS will hopefully continue to pre-adjudicate rest of the inventory and in Aug or Sept VB, CO will adjust the retrogressed PD to make sure that no visas are wasted.

---

I am inclined to believe that by law (or at least in spirit), GC is required be handed out in order of PD. Although in practical world, the strict enforcement of FIFO is difficult (timing differences of filing I-485, processing speed at service center/ of individual cases etc), I would assume that there shouldn’t be a material deviation from FIFO. Failure would lead to processing arbitrage as people who are most unlikely to get a GC in the current FY (eg: late 2009 or early 2010 PD) could opt for CP as it would give them a better shot at GC in current FY (even with the risks associated with CP vs AoS). Is there a way to switch between AoS and CP interchangeably multiple times after I-485 filing since that may prevent/ limit processing arbitrage? I know that you can switch processing (AoS to CP) prior to I-485 filing. Has anyone on the forum discussed legal recourse with an attorney if people with a later PD are approved GC than yours?

If retrogression is solely based on USCIS visa demand and DoS has no visibility into the USCIS, then CO would make the dates current rather than rely on a department he has no control over and lose visas. Even with a huge PD movement in remaining bulletins, only some of the new petitions would convert into actual visa demand based on USCIS processing times. So there is obviously more at play and I find it difficult to comprehend that there is no co-ordination between USCIS and Visa Office.

Has anyone modeled the number of projected GC filings (I-485 plus CP filings) based on the monthly bulletins? I am trying to figure out the potential cumulative GC filings until March 2012 leading to eventual I-485 inventory build-up and would appreciate if the gurus can provide tables/ data. This may help in fine tuning the models and assumptions once more concrete data (I-485 Inventory reports, Demand Data etc) is available and also provide clarity on next round of PD movement.

Funny enough but I do not really think that law requires that. It goes without saying that FIFO is a generally accepted norm. And I think USCIS and DOS follow that after all othre restrictive condictions are met such as EB vs FB or EB1 vs EB2 and Country A vs Country B.

But to my knowledge (which is imperfect I admit) there is no law for issuance of GC in the order of PD.

Here is a logical check for that - If there were such law then the delays in one case will affect all cases behind it. So even the simplest delays in RFEs for BCs will cascade.

My 2 cents....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikrant

I am inclined to believe that by law (or at least in spirit), GC is required be handed out in order of PD.

---

Q, I cannot find the applicable law, but I do recall and found by searching, the statement which CO made last year when he announced the 12k numbers from EB1 to be spillover.

http://www.jackson-hertogs.com/news/2011/20110329.shtml

and

http://www.cilawgroup.com/news/2011/...ia-to-advance/

"AILA has reported that the EB-2 cut-off dates in the upcoming Visa Bulletin should progress ahead, perhaps substantially, because of a decrease in EB-1 filings since October 2010. Charlie Oppenheim, Chief, Immigrant Visa Control and Reporting Division, U.S. Department of State stated:

"[US]CIS says they have seen a decline in filings, and does not expect a change in the number use pattern. Therefore, this decline in EB-1 number use will allow me to begin having those 'otherwise unused' numbers drop down and be available for use in the EB-2 category. Based on current indications, that would mean that at least 12,000 additional numbers will be available to the EB-2 category. This situation will allow me to advance the India EB-2 cut-off date for May. The reason being that all 'otherwise unused' numbers are provided strictly in priority date order, and the India demand has the largest concentration of early dates."

-----

Vikrant:
a. Either USCIS is not caring about above law or guideline by DOS
b. Agencies are confident of giving visas completely for the highmark they are setting. for eg: if March 2008 guy got it, they are confident that eventually in the FY, they will clear uptill march 2008

I agree with kd and imdeng analysis also

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Funny enough but I do not really think that law requires that. It goes without saying that FIFO is a generally accepted norm. And I think USCIS and DOS follow that after all othre restrictive condictions are met such as EB vs FB or EB1 vs EB2 and Country A vs Country B.

But to my knowledge (which is imperfect I admit) there is no law for issuance of GC in the order of PD.

Here is a logical check for that - If there were such law then the delays in one case will affect all cases behind it. So even the simplest delays in RFEs for BCs will cascade.

My 2 cents....

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nishant2200

Q, I cannot find the applicable law, but I do recall and found by searching, the statement which CO made last year when he announced the 12k numbers from EB1 to be spillover.

http://www.jackson-hertogs.com/news/2011/20110329.shtml

and

http://www.cilawgroup.com/news/2011/...ia-to-advance/

"AILA has reported that the EB-2 cut-off dates in the upcoming Visa Bulletin should progress ahead, perhaps substantially, because of a decrease in EB-1 filings since October 2010. Charlie Oppenheim, Chief, Immigrant Visa Control and Reporting Division, U.S. Department of State stated:

"[US]CIS says they have seen a decline in filings, and does not expect a change in the number use pattern. Therefore, this decline in EB-1 number use will allow me to begin having those 'otherwise unused' numbers drop down and be available for use in the EB-2 category. Based on current indications, that would mean that at least 12,000 additional numbers will be available to the EB-2 category. This situation will allow me to advance the India EB-2 cut-off date for May. The reason being that all 'otherwise unused' numbers are provided strictly in priority date order, and the India demand has the largest concentration of early dates."

---

I think the emphasis there is on the spillover usage - in your highlighted sentence. Spillover usage strictly follows PD order (when it falls across).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mysati

I think the emphasis there is on the spillover usage - in your highlighted sentence. Spillover usage strictly follows PD order (when it falls across).

---

yes of course, we are already well past the 5.6k regular quota of EB2IC. so what we have now is definitely SO fall across or fall down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikrant

I am inclined to believe that by law (or at least in spirit), GC is required be handed out in order of PD. Although in practical world, the strict enforcement of FIFO is difficult (timing differences of filing I-485, processing speed at service center/ of individual cases etc), I would assume that there shouldn’t be a material deviation from FIFO. Failure would lead to processing arbitrage as people who are most unlikely to get a GC in the current FY (eg: late 2009 or early 2010 PD) could opt for CP as it would give them a better shot at GC in current FY (even with the risks associated with CP vs AoS). Is there a way to switch between AoS and CP interchangeably multiple times after I-485 filing since that may prevent/ limit processing arbitrage? I know that you can switch processing (AoS to CP) prior to I-485 filing. Has anyone on the forum discussed legal recourse with an attorney if people with a later PD are approved GC than yours?

If retrogression is solely based on USCIS visa demand and DoS has no visibility into the USCIS, then CO would make the dates current rather than rely on a department he has no control over and lose visas. Even with a huge PD movement in remaining bulletins, only some of the new petitions would convert into actual visa demand based on USCIS processing times. So there is obviously more at play and I find it difficult to comprehend that there is no co-ordination between USCIS and Visa Office.

Has anyone modeled the number of projected GC filings (I-485 plus CP filings) based on the monthly bulletins? I am trying to figure out the potential cumulative GC filings until March 2012 leading to eventual I-485 inventory build-up and would appreciate if the gurus can provide tables/ data. This may help in fine tuning the models and assumptions once more concrete data (I-485 Inventory reports, Demand Data etc) is available and also provide clarity on next round of PD movement.

---

To answer your data modeling question:

Estimated number of I485 may be arrived at (number of EB2/3IC perm applications for period you are looking for) multiplied by a factor (called OR ) ranging from 0.6 to 1. You can pick your OR. For number of PERM filing for a given period please refer to FACTS AND DATA section.

If you moved and have put an auto-forward with USPS then yes, any mail from USCIS (for that matter, any mail from Federal Govt) will not be forwarded - they will be returned back to USCIS. It is best to update your address with USCIS (they have a web form for that) and call them to confirm that they have the current address. They used to be pretty slow in updating their address record but I am told that they are pretty fast these days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arikepudi

I have read in some forum stating that USCIS mails will not be forwarded. Is that true ?

---

Gurus,

My priority date got current in the Feb-12 bulletin (PD: Nov 2009) and I have submitted my paperwork to my lawyers (hoping they submit my application in a week or so). Given the potential surge in the number of applicants, how long do you think it will take for USCIS/DOS to process the applications? When should we expect to get our EADs and Green Cards? From reading various posts on this board, I understand that they typically (but not always) follow FIFO.....also at the point when they pick up the application, visa numbers need to be available, etc....it is not very clear in my mind what to expect....

Could one of you shed some light on this? Know for a fact that there are several people like me who recently filed / are in the process of filing, but have on idea what the timeline may be.

Cheers,

Adi

CASE STATUS UPDATE:

PD : 12/18/2008
RD : 01/12/2012
FP : 02/09/2012
EAD/AP : 02/15/2012
Service center : Texas