Printable View
I'm confused, why are the approval numbers so low esp 2007 & 2008 ? Gurus can you please help me understand these numbers.
----------------------------
YEAR APR DCN %A %D
----------------------------
2005 5,042 340 94% 6%
2006 2,991 146 95% 5%
2007 2,459 283 90% 10%
2008 2,148 172 93% 7%
2009 3,893 300 93% 7%
2010 3,140 306 91% 9%
----------------------------
Looks like this is sampling data than actual data?Quote:
Originally Posted by mygctracker
Looks like it's only dealing with the "exceptional ability" sub category in the case of EB2. Most people may be under the "advanced degree" subcategory...
Quote:
Originally Posted by mygctracker
you are right GCL. EB2 data given is only as it relates to the "Exceptional Ability".Quote:
Originally Posted by Gclongwait
However, the EB1 data is certainly confusing. Although the website says, the data pertains to all of EB1; it looks like the data only relates to "Extraordinary" EB1 (i.e. pulitzer, oscar or olympic medal etc).
Well, The catergories are
Aliens with extraordinary ability, new arrivals (E11)
Aliens with extraordinary ability, adjustments (E16)
Outstanding professors or researchers, new arrivals (E12)
Outstanding professors or researchers, adjustments (E17)
Multinational executives or managers, new arrivals (E13)
Multinational executives or managers, adjustments (E18)
Professionals holding advanced degrees, new arrivals (E21)
Professionals holding advanced degrees, adjustments (E26)
as per immigration statistics handbook. So its EB1A and EB1B non-AOS cases. I hope that makes sense. Or it may be EB1A and EB1B cases primary applicants only. Who knows!
Can some one please clarify?
EB2 India for Jan 2007 was 1505 in the Inventory data dtd 1-oct-2010, while the same was 1540 in the report dtd 5-Jan-2011.
EB2 India for Feb 2007 was 1431 in the Inventory data dtd 1-oct-2010, while the same was 1444 in the report dtd 5-Jan-2011.
How the figures have increased? Is USCIS include EB3 to EB2 porting cases also?
That's a good question....Would'nt any increase in numbers from 2002 to 2007 be because of porting? Why else would say even 2002 numbers increase from 86 to 98.Quote:
Originally Posted by gcwait2007
It looks like that's porting.Quote:
Originally Posted by gcwait2007
As per Ron, porting is never counted. EB3 application will continue to be there and if a EB-2 is recognized with in the cut off date, GC/ visa will be issued, while EB3 application will continue to be pending.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
Can some one please clarify? Thanks in advance.
Guys it could also be addition of local office cases.Quote:
Originally Posted by gcwait2007
USCIS updated that statistics page. Now Table B provides data on the approval and denial for the E-12 classification (Outstanding Professor or Researcher) of the Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers.
I hope this helps with EB1 calculations. These numbers are only primary applicants. No dependents.
It took me few days to go thru the blog....Thanks to all for your contributions.....my PD is Feb 2011 in EB2. I'll probably be a fu*king millionaire before I get the GC in Eb2 n if I become one then please forgive me if I use a couple of numbers in EB5. Just saying.
On a serious note, guys n gals....dont forget -> more than anything else, LIFE is the biggest thing...Enjoy it everyday!!
LOL... You have excellent optimismQuote:
Originally Posted by zzz666
Later USCIS clarified that these data are EB1A and EB1B.Quote:
Originally Posted by mygctracker
These data represent 35% to 40% and rest 60% to 65% used by EB1C.
Thanks GCWait. This is useful info.
Also check this out at Ron Gotcher's website. Are labor filings really up?
I think what he says makes sense. Filings in last few years may be up because of
-----------------A) category porting EB3->2 (which we knew and our model factors that in) and
-----------------B) job porting i.e. AC21. (which we knew but didn't factor in our model.)
So the second piece may create some upside to our model. (may be a couple of months max).
Quote:
Originally Posted by gcwait2007
Yes these tables represent EB1 A & B respectively. The big reason for EB1 A denials is that its a self filed petition and people fro pretty diverse fields do it. EB1 B requires a Phd or super specialization so if you have the qualification you are kind of good to go. A rough breakup out of my gut feeling is EB1-A - 15%, EB1-B - 25% and EB1-C 60%. So EB1-A really is the smallest component. Guys what are your thoughts about EB2 I140 denial percentage, IMHO as I have been saying its probably 20%.Quote:
Originally Posted by gcwait2007
Q a large category of folks who do it are also those who change employers and file labor and I140 again, they can capture their PD if the previous I140 was approved. I don't believe that Eb2-EB3 porting could be that large.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
Teddy given that EB1-B is tougher than EB2, won't you think EB2s denial % will be less than or equal to EB1-B (i.e. 6-7%)?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
Q here is the reason why.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
- EB1-B people would apply only if they are Phd.
- EB2 is being applied by folks who have a 3 Yr only degree + experience high chance of denial.
- Folks with 3 + 2 or 3 + 1 also face educational evaluation issues.
- 4 Yr degree folks also face issues typically if their branch is no IT and they work in IT.
- Ability to Pay RFE's are more likely for EB2 as companies file more petitions, while EB1-B most companies may file 1 or 2 except for the really big ones.
- People are whole heartedly trying for PD porting and its better to try and get denied than not just try at all, all that is lost is money but all that can be gained is priceless.
That's interesting. Good logic. Thanks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
This guy is trying to draw some business, remember he doesn't speak facts all the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
This may be old post Court case against Infosys accuses it of visa and tax fraud
This could impact not only H1B/L1B but also EB1C filings, going forward.
You r right. He is generally quite inflammatory. But in this case he could actually be right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by veni001
What happened to last year's Family Based Visa left overs? Have they not been carried to EB category in this year?
Ron has replied to one of the queries as follows-
Re: EB2 will not become current for India/China I have to disagree with that assessment. The number of "spill over" visas from Worldwide EB2 last year was almost equal to the known EB2 India backlog. The reason that the backlog did not go down was because more than 15,000 India EB3 cases with earlier priority dates were upgraded to EB2. That is going to come to an end in the not too distant future. When it does, India EB2 will start moving forward very quickly.
GCW that statement is not even worth 5 seconds of attention. If we give credence to such things ... we are doing disservice to those who come here for objective good information.
p.s. - Don't doubt your good intentions though!
Quote:
Originally Posted by gcwait2007
Sorry for quick posting without adding my comments.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
According to Ron, the actual spillover was around 42K last year. However the whole spillover did not go for EB2 India and China backlog clearence/ reduction. While 27K helped to move the date to 08-May-2006 for EB2 India and China, rest 15K went for porting.
According to Ron, one can expect similar spillover this year as well but porting will be cleared. Over a period of time, the porting wave is expected to stop and spillover will be passed to clear the backlog of EB2India and China.
Last year there was a surge in PERM approvals which resulted in EB2 ROW to consume significant and yet they did manage to provide visas to EB2 IC. But it is nowhere in teh range what you are quoting below.
This year there will be some after effects of the PERM surge from last year but the ROW approvals will be much less compared to 2010. However since FB spillover is missing this year (almost 10K) ...overall SOFAD will be slighly less or equal to last year.
Ron G's statements and numbers are a gimmick to attrack more EB2->3 cases to his account.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gcwait2007
I think when we quote somebody, in this case Mr Ron Gotcher, we must also quote the question we posed initially. If not, the quote can develop it's own meaning, much different from the original. I know it's more a oversight on your part but I wanted to bring it up. I'm sure I have done this many times before...so please don't take it personally. I'm no way defending the logic in Ron's answer, I know his answer is flawed.
Here is the question posed to Ron:
"My employer's immigration attorney indicated that EB2 will never become current in the future even if the dates advance by a year to July 2007. According to him it will only advance few months at a time even if visa numbers are available. According to him the powers to make EB2 current rests with the state department and that they would not do it in the future as CIS opposes making EB2 current.
This is the first time I heard this version. Is this correct ? "
Quote:
Originally Posted by gcwait2007
I agree with you completelyQuote:
Originally Posted by leo07
Agree about context.
By the way I agree with the attorney with a qualifier. I do think that EB2 won't be current anytime soon EXCEPT for a month or two max to create a window to take in additional 485 applications. But other than that exception actually the other attorney is right on money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by leo07
Based on Ron's comments, 15K EB3-I cases were ported to EB2 category. Does this estimate look correct? I think EB3->EB2 porting was much lower than this number last year; else, we would have observed the number of pending EB2 cases shrinking in a similar proportion. Or, maybe I am mis-interpreting Ron's statement.
Ron has over estimated the porting cases by 5 times.Quote:
Originally Posted by pch053
I agree. If there was such high porting, the dates would have retrogessed to way behind. My understanding of the bulletin date is that the last date that can get a visa is where it is set. If porting was 15K then many people from for eg 2004, 2003 or for that matter any date who are porting also could not have gotten visas therefore the dates would have retrogessed. I think most gurus here by now agree that porting is just enough to use the 2.7K visas a year.Quote:
Originally Posted by gcwait2007
Ofcourse the one thing that may be happening is most porting is from dates after 8th May 06 which anyway is not current. My gut instinct is that more porting may be happening on PD after July 07 since before that people already have EAD and AP which gives them freedom from employer, freedom from visa stamping and freedom from the 2 month sword hanging on your head if you lose your job.
Wonder what gurus say about this?
Earlier in the thread, there was a conversation about the ratio of EB2 to EB3 applications in the PERM data.
There were differing opinions, but mainly these were based on gut feel. There was also a discussion about using Salary level and Wage Level to further refine the data.
Recently DOL have published data on Prevailing Wage Determination (PWD) requests for both FY2010 and Q1 FY2011 http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/quarterlydata.cfm
This data includes the minimum educational and experience requirements, which could be very useful for determining EB2 vs. EB3.
The analyzed data is presented below. I was quite aggressive in pruning the Other category when determining which Preference Category the job was likely to fall under, although it doesn’t form a huge % of the data set.
PWD Requests FY2010
Category -- No. ------ %
EB2 ------ 33,404 -- 65.84%
EB3 ------ 17,332 -- 34.16%
Total ---- 50,736 - 100.00%
Min Education --------- No. ----- %
Bachelors + 5 -------- 9,916 -- 29.69%
Masters ------------- 18,904 -- 56.59%
PhD ------------------ 2,169 --- 6.49%
Other (JD, MD etc) --- 2,415 --- 7.23%
Total --------------- 33,404 - 100.00%
Obvious non EB2 removed from Other
The data for FY2010 is not the complete picture, since is only covers the period from Jan 20, 2010 to 30 Sep, 2010. Pro-rated for the entire year would give a total of c.73k.
(2)Disclosure data includes prevailing wage determinations issued from the OFLC iCERT Visa Portal System between January 20 and September 30, 2010 when employers began electronic filing of requests for prevailing wage determinations.
(3)Prior to January 1, 2010, all prevailing wage determinations were received and processed by State Workforce Agencies. No national level electronic record data are available.
PWD Requests Q1 FY2011
Category -- No. ------ %
EB2 ------ 16,309 -- 68.94%
EB3 ------- 7,348 -- 31.06%
Total ---- 23,657 - 100.00%
Min Education --------- No. ----- %
Bachelors + 5 -------- 4,679 -- 28.69%
Masters -------------- 9,828 -- 60.26%
PhD -------------------- 992 --- 6.08%
Other (JD, MD etc) ----- 810 --- 4.97%
Total --------------- 16,309 - 100.00%
Obvious non EB2 removed from Other
The % splits have remained fairly consistent.
Unfortunately, Country data is not provided in the PWD data. I don’t think it would be an unfair assumption, given the Cut Off Dates, to suppose that the % of EB2 applications for India would be higher than shown and that ROW would be lower.
Overall, that leads me to think that, for ROW, a 50:50 split for EB2:EB3 might be be a reasonable working assumption to make.
Beyond that, I don’t want to make any further inferences.
Spec, good to see you back. Your information makes perfect sense to me. As EB3 has become a black tunnel, it would be natural we would see increased appetite for EB2. For ROW, 50-50 split makes sense. It is supported by trackitt data.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Does it make any change in EB2 forward predictions? Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
Probably not. I think I was using the same assumptions. However the denial rates data that somebody published a few pages back probably helps us by a month or two.
p.s. I think I have used 50-50 ratio between ROW and IC as well as between EB2-3.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gcwait2007
Spec,Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Welcome back, good analysis.
Also (%) of the porting cases from the PERM data is unknown.
+ 1, Spec welcome back as always very thorough, highly detailed and great analysis from you.Quote:
Originally Posted by veni001