Printable View
Spec,Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
You forgot to mention April which based on trackitt numbers was the month when the highest number of EB2ROW approvals occurred.
Don't you think it is hard to believe that inventory for EB2ROW went down by only 2.1 K for April+May+June+ (May be 20 days of July) ?
I am just finding that number published in the inventory hard to believe. Any inputs ?
EB2I has about 17,500 just in 2008,2009 and 2010. That plus porting numbers. If next FY is anything like this FY then I don't think it'll even go beyond 2009 by the end of FY16.
For a rough calc, EB1 inventory is 27K and EB2 45K.
Availability next year for these two categories: 83K
Assuming a steady state approval times and queue, this should mean an additional 11K of backlogged EB1 and 2 can be approved.
This should mean EB2 India should move into early 2011 by end-2016. Given the objective to move dates sooner rather than later, this should happen by around Jun 2016.
I am already suspecting above is too simplistic. Gurus please advise.
I'm hesitant to reply to these questions, but here goes anyway.Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4WatItsWorth
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4WatItsWorth
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmys
As for this FY, I think we're looking at 4 figures rather than 5. If pushed, I'd guess at 6-8k, but with a low confidence level.
It's really too early to talk about next FY.
At a very broad view (speculation really), FY2016 should be better than this FY, but don't expect miracles absent major changes to the system. Maybe a few extra thousands.
There won't be the sharp spike in non IC approvals seen in FY2015, but OFLC have been very productive this FY and the number of certified PERM is heading for well in excess of 70k for the FY.
Although over 6k of these to date are CTS certifications (99% Indian), ROW certifications have been at a continuing healthy level. Many of these will only be seen as I-485 approvals in FY2016.
In addition, OFLC have requested budget in FY2016 for 17 additional employees to reduce the PERM backlog, which is currently in excess of 60k. If granted:
This means we can expect healthy numbers of certifications to continue as FY2016 begins.Quote:
With these resources, OFLC projects that 96,450 PERM applications will be processed – a 36 percent increase from FY 2014 and over 16,000 more applications than are expected to be received in FY 2016.
Inevitably, that would result in an increased number of ROW certifications. Whether it impacts FY2016 might be determined by the timing of the new hires.
On the other hand, the budget proposal also mentions the introduction of a fee for PERM. It's possible (although unlikely IMO) that this could deter some from filing PERM.
It's possible more ROW could apply at the I-140 stage under EB3, given that the EB3-ROW COD is virtually Current. On the other hand, unless EB2-ROW retrogresses, there isn't really any advantage or incentive to do so. It isn't analogous to the China situation.
If some kind of preregistration is introduced, it's almost certain that concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 will be discontinued. That may have some effect, dependent on timing, but it will probably just lead to an increase in PP requests for I-140 processing (where available). The effect is possibly limited anyway, since USCIS do very little processing of the I-485 until the I-140 is approved.
If preregistration is introduced, I suspect it will mirror the NVC model where applicants can documentarily qualify 6-12 months before the COD is expected to reach their PD. AOS applicants within 6-12 months of the COD could file their I-485/I-131/I-765 packages. The cases should be preadjudicated (and a visa number requested from DOS) by the time the COD reaches the PD.
This could be a double edged sword. With much more accurate figures available to DOS of preadjudicated cases, the need for large forward movements of the COD to build an Inventory would no longer exist. Eventually, the COD would only move very slowly forward from 01MAY10, rather than a large jump similar to that seen in FY2012.
If DOS move to a quarterly release of spillover model (Q would be pleased), the ongoing COD movement might become small but relatively constant (barring large demand from non IC cases in later quarters). A quarterly spillover model should mean that relatively few approvals are needed in Q4 compared to the present.
I don't think porting will decline as much as some other people do in FY2016.
a) The process is quite long and those who will port in FY2016 have already started the process. There's a delay of at least a year, once porting slows.
b) The majority of porting now seem to come from relatively later PD years. EB3-I won't reach those dates in FY2016, so the advantage of porting still exists.
I don't know if anyone else has noticed that the Inventory only reduces YoY by less than 60% of the actual visa numbers that EB2-I has received.
FY2013
Actual -- 17,193
Change --- 9,834
% ------- 57.20%
FY2014
Actual -- 23,528
Change -- 12,276
% ------- 52.18%
Given the number remaining and the likely availability of visa numbers next year, it seems extremely difficult for EB2-I to move beyond a COD somewhere in the second half of 2009 if that trend continues. Of course, it may not. For instance, porting cases seemed somewhat better represented in the Inventory this FY.
I've outlined some thoughts and concerns - I'll leave it to other people to outline the up sides.
Given the number remaining and the likely availability of visa numbers next year, it seems extremely difficult for EB2-I to move beyond a COD somewhere in the second half of 2009 if that trend continues. Of course, it may not. For instance, porting cases seemed somewhat better represented in the Inventory this FY.
This is seriously scary. What wrong did we do to get a 2009 priority date and later :(. I just need a 10 yr any work Visa to US that will do I will just pass the GC mess.
With a PD of Oct 2009, as much as I now feel that I shouldn't have asked and should have blissfully remained ignorant, thank you very much for taking the time to put your thoughts together and answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
It is so sad that PD+7 years does not look long enough to get current now.
I agree ..extremely disappointing day for EB2IQuote:
Originally Posted by 4WatItsWorth
Thanks Neel- can you pls share your what you find out...i have a similar priority date as you and wondering if i should be expecting a RFE for medical and if yes, then how much time do they give to resubmit.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeelVohra
It wasn't my intention to cause unnecessary anguish to people. I'm sorry if I have done so. It was one of the reasons I was hesitant to make the post.
Please treat it as my speaking out loud some of the things I have been thinking about, rather than a considered analysis.
By now, the old timers should realize I tend to see the worst in a given situation, so use my comments in conjunction with your own to make a considered judgement of the prospects for next year.
I think the point I wanted to make was that we knew FY2015 was going to be difficult and that is how it was, but don't expect a return to 20k approvals in FY2016.
I agree Spec. That's the bottomline.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Spec,
Thank you for that post. It helps me in setting a realistic expectation. Having june 2009 PD and missing the 2012 boat, I am now relying on I-140 EAD. It hurts but its good to know the the worst case scenarios so that my hopes wont get crushed with VB movement ( or lack thereof) .
Is it the first time in last 8 years, where the COD for EB2-I did not move compared to the previous year?
Every FY it had been moving at least 6 months to 1 year?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gcpursuit
bvsamrat,Quote:
Originally Posted by bvsamrat
That's true, but that movement has been possible because EB2-I has received large numbers of visas due to spillover.
That in turn was possible due to a series of beneficial factors: low EB5 usage in the early years, Kazarian's effect on EB1, beneficial changes in PERM processing times, large numbers of extra visas from FB, over allocation in FY2012 when EB2-WW had to be retrogressed etc.
Underlying those numbers, the situation wasn't as good as it appeared and this year none of those factors are present and EB2-WW has higher than normal demand.
I found thru Trackitt that RFE notices now have standardized to 84 days. Please see Standard RFE Timeframe Memo. Even upon request, we may not get a RFE notice that specifies the deadline. Best is to confirm in an InfoPass or with your lawyer.Quote:
Originally Posted by lozolneo
You can also review the discussion on Trackitt.
Hi Spec,
Thanks for your FY 16 insight.
This year dates started moving much earlier than usually did. This year DoS/USCIS had great control over EB2-I supply/demand than previous years. Only around 2,500 pending prior to Oct 1,2008 based on Apr-June inventory and there are EB2-I approvals in Aug,too. It leaves great probability of dates moving again in 1st Q of FY 16.Quote:
Originally Posted by bvsamrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Interesting thread from Ron - Not to take the inventory numbers seriously
http://www.immigration-information.c...ulletin.19153/
gcvijay,Quote:
Originally Posted by gcvijay
I agree with him to a point, but not to completely dismissing it as he does.
There has to be an understanding of the limitations of the Inventory data and what can be reliably inferred from it. I don't think people always do that.
We know there is a problem with double counting porting cases in both EB2 and EB3.
For Countries that are Current or near Current, the Inventory does not represent all I-485 submitted. The I-140 associated with it must also be approved.
That means that regular processed I-140 cases may not appear for some time and that the I-485 may be approved between Inventories - it may never appear in an Inventory at all.
That is particularly possible for categories such as EB2-NIW and EB1C where PP is not available.
For habitually retrogressed Countries, the data should be a better indicator. Of course, that does assume that USCIS are showing all the cases. You know what they say about people who assume.
It was very noticeable when EB3-ROW moved forward initially that many more cases were appearing.
Having said that, for retrogressed Countries, the numbers were in fairly good agreement with the Demand Data that DOS used to publish.
People tend not to consider that CP exists and may represent significant numbers for some Countries/Categories in addition to the AOS cases that the Inventory purports to show.
People tend to forget that EB3-EW also use up the EB3 allocation - albeit only 5k per year.
The change in numbers between Inventories only represents a net change - it's impossible to know visa use if you don't also know how many were added during the period.
It's better than nothing. I think we would all agree it's better to have the Inventory published than have no information at all. I certainly feel that way and miss those reports that are no longer published, such as USCIS Dashboard and the DOS Demand Data.
Thanks Spec !!! Another update from Fragomen website says that the date will be back to what it was in Oct or even surpass dates when FY 2016 kicks in. Ofcourse we need to take these with a pinch of salt and pepper.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
http://mail.fragomen.com/newsresourc...erts&news=3242
gcvijay:
The dates has to move in Oct 15 VB and will most likely surpass Oct 1,2008 in Oct 15 or coming months. Apr-June inventory shows only about 2.5K pending cases for EB2-I. And, if you reduce the approvals that happened after 7/20/15, the EB2-I inventory will be further depleted. To make use of EB2-I's annual quota for FY 16 the dates has to be moved beyond Oct 1,2008.
This is exactly what I said in my post yesterday. The approvals in Apr+May+Jun+July(20 days) for EB2ROW were too many and inventory only diminishing for EB2ROW only by 2.1 K is unrealistic.Quote:
Originally Posted by gcvijay
I pointed it out yesterday and stick by it. The numbers are not accurate for EB2ROW in particular.
I have received RFE notifications for me and my wife for our I485. My priority date is April 02 2010. I am expecting them to be Medical and EVL related RFE's.
Did you recently change job or file AC21? Just curious....Quote:
Originally Posted by April2010
We did not see any mass RFEs. So that should have been a indicator that dates are not going to move forward. I think if the dates are to move forward we will start seeing RFEs.
EB2 = FUBAR
Also, why is EB2C at the same date as EB2 I? That makes me wonder how accurate the numbers are!
That is what CO always does during spillover season. So that visas are allocated strictly based on priority date regardless of country of birth. Spillover visas has no country cap !Quote:
Originally Posted by geterdone
I did change my job 4 months ago but I doubt it is reg. AC21 as my wife also received RFE notification. I believe it is Medicals and EVL. I will share the details once I receive mail from USCIS.
Waiting for Spec and other gurus' take on this.
From Ron's forum : http://www.immigration-information.c...47#post-101349
Here are the notes from the most recent (August 13th) chat with Charlie Oppenheim:
QUESTION 1: Last month you were hopeful that EB-2 India/China would hold steady or possibly advance for September. However both categories have retrogressed significantly. What caused this to occur?
ANSWER: The September retrogression of EB-2 China and India can primarily be attributed to skyrocketing demand for EB-2 Worldwide, which has left fewer numbers available for India and China. Currently, the availability of visas for India and China is largely driven by Worldwide demand. Earlier this year, EB-2 Worldwide demand was around 2,400 per month and started creeping up in March. In June, demand peaked at 6,700, and with July usage totaling 4,400 it was necessary to take corrective action for EB-2 China and India to limit future number use.
Similarly, fewer EB-1 numbers are available to fall down to EB-2 China and India. During the second quarter of the fiscal year, 9,300 EB-1 numbers were used. That jumped to 13,500 EB-1 numbers in the third quarter.
In particular, overall EB-2 India usage is down significantly this year due to the fact that fewer unused numbers are available for this category. Last fiscal year, EB-2 India used approximately 23,000 numbers. This year, it is expected that EB-2 India will use approximately 7,500 numbers. This is approximately 9,700 fewer numbers than that which were used in FY 2013.
QUESTION 2: How likely is it that EB-2 India and China will advance significantly with the start of the fiscal year on October 1?
It is expected that the dates will advance in October as we enter the new fiscal year. EB-2 India is likely to advance to a date between February and April 2005.
QUESTION 3: Is it expected that all numbers in all categories will be exhausted by the end of the fiscal year?
ANSWER: Yes. All visa numbers in all categories will be exhausted. There has been some concern about EB-3 number use because there appeared to be a decrease in demand which caused the Worldwide cut-off date to advanced rapidly. There is sufficient EB-3 India applicants in the pending demand file to ensure that all "otherwise" unused numbers will be used this fiscal year.
QUESTION 4: The "Visa Modernization" proposal promises to refine the monthly allocation of visas, increasing the number of visas allocated during the first three quarters, and implementing new processes for allocation during the final quarter of the fiscal year. Can you please elaborate on this plan? Do you expect to implement the changes effective 10/1/15?
ANSWER: This is still a work in progress but members should be happy with what is ultimately rolled out. Some changes have already been implemented. As stated in the Visa Modernization proposal, members may see more aggressive cut-off date movements for some preference categories earlier in the year. Similar movement occurred earlier this year with regard to EB-2 India; advancement of that category started much earlier than in prior years to allow USCIS sufficient time to complete processing of the cases, many of which were EB-3 upgrades, earlier within the fiscal year. However, aggressive movement earlier in the year can have "negative" consequences during the final quarter when there are fewer numbers available. As a result it could be necessary to take corrective action if it becomes clear that there would be fewer numbers available from other categories.
In addition to accelerating cut-off date movements earlier in the fiscal year, other options are being explored. As plans are refined, the information will be made available to the public.