EB2-3 Predictions (Rather Calculations) - 2013

My overall take on this David guy is:

A) In the past CO has given out information to lawyers that turned out completely wrong. (This may have happened by design or not. We will never know).
B) Whatever this particular lawyer has said is so vague and so useless that it's a waste of time to even think about it.
C) The fact that somebody registers just to post this information doesn't pass the smell taste. I would consider it more credible if it had been come from somebody who we knew at least for a few months.

As per predictions ..... I feel just as comfortable with our current prediction since no new information is really available that changes anything.

p.s. - I did see sbhagwat's calculations. I think 40K for ROW is quite a stretch. 26K is usually where they come in at. However it is quite possible that EB3ROW may be moving to EB2 ... just like EB3IC.... but my guess is you have to simply think about it in the same proportion.... not more not less. e.g. If there is 3K indians moving to EB2 from EB3 and if EB3 backlog is 30K (just making this up) ... then the ratio is 10%. So apply the same over entire EB3 because Indians are no special in their desire to move to EB2. After you plug in real numbers .. that should reveal ROW migration to EB2. I am pretty sure that shouldn't exceed 5-6K max.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

My overall take on this David guy is:

A) In the past CO has given out information to lawyers that turned out completely wrong. (This may have happened by design or not. We will never know).
B) Whatever this particular lawyer has said is so vague and so useless that it's a waste of time to even think about it.
C) The fact that somebody registers just to post this information doesn't pass the smell taste. I would consider it more credible if it had been come from somebody who we knew at least for a few months.

As per predictions ..... I feel just as comfortable with our current prediction since no new information is really available that changes anything.

p.s. - I did see sbhagwat's calculations. I think 40K for ROW is quite a stretch. 26K is usually where they come in at. However it is quite possible that EB3ROW may be moving to EB2 ... just like EB3IC.... but my guess is you have to simply think about it in the same proportion.... not more not less. e.g. If there is 3K indians moving to EB2 from EB3 and if EB3 backlog is 30K (just making this up) ... then the ratio is 10%. So apply the same over entire EB3 because Indians are no special in their desire to move to EB2. After you plug in real numbers .. that should reveal ROW migration to EB2. I am pretty sure that shouldn't exceed 5-6K max.

---

Q,

I agree that, in isolation, we can't give too much weight to this news. There is no context to judge the information and it does not fit with everything we know.

It's a bit unfair to air your reservations about the new user. In fact, sbhagwat also contacted the Law firm and received the same information, so an established member did confirm the news.

Again we have confusion about what ROW means to different people. The 40k figure refers to EB2-WW (ROW-M-P) and certainly is not a stretch for that group this FY. I agree it would be absurd for ROW alone. 26k for ROW as a normal run rate is a bit low IMO. Recently 29-30k has been more normal.

Like you, I see no reason to alter my prediction at this time.

It doesn't pass the smell test Spec is all I am saying. Sbhagwat only contacted the lawyer after he read about this lawyer on the forum.

What is unfair to the new user is situation and circumstances and the scant information being posted. If somebody can post scan information - others should be able to at least raise questions!! Be fair to me Spec!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spectator

Q,
It's a bit unfair to air your reservations about the new user. In fact, sbhagwat also contacted the Law firm and received the same information, so an established member did confirm the news.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbhagwat2000

Lawyers who reply like this will speak the truth and will always have the correct info.

---

You give them too much credit.
I'll stick with the forum's near-consensus estimates for now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

It doesn't pass the smell test Spec is all I am saying. Sbhagwat only contacted the lawyer after he read about this lawyer on the forum.

What is unfair to the new user is situation and circumstances and the scant information being posted. If somebody can post scan information - others should be able to at least raise questions!! Be fair to me Spec!!

---

I agree with Q.

Not related to EB2I, but pertains to Immigration. To check the thoughts of Gurus I am posting the link here
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/rub...4/16/id/499727

“In addition to that we’ve gotten rid of the per country quota, one of the things that didn’t make a lot of sense.
We should be able to attract the best and brightest in the world irrespective of what country they’re coming from"

No offense taken. For a change I am going to be optimistic. I went back and checked COs predictions in past years like 2010 and found he always speaks in general terms without bringing SO in the conversation. So in 2010 at one point he was saying dates will move by a few weeks. Finally ended up moving by more than a year. So yes I agree with Q this is a very generic statement made by CO if he ever made it. as far as my calculations were concerned yes I was saying EB2 WW. And it reaching 40000 is not a stretch. Just that thinking about it more i think if the demand for WW was so high to reach 40000 CO would have mentioned officialy in the bulletin like EB5 that cutoff would be applied for WW. Lets see where WW ends. Another thing I was looking at tarckitt trends for this month and both WW and EB2 I approvals are way down. hope this trend continues

Thank you sbhagwat, I didn't feel good about my post, so I deleted it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spectator

Q,

I agree that, in isolation, we can't give too much weight to this news. There is no context to judge the information and it does not fit with everything we know.

It's a bit unfair to air your reservations about the new user. In fact, sbhagwat also contacted the Law firm and received the same information, so an established member did confirm the news.

Again we have confusion about what ROW means to different people. The 40k figure refers to EB2-WW (ROW-M-P) and certainly is not a stretch for that group this FY. I agree it would be absurd for ROW alone. 26k for ROW as a normal run rate is a bit low IMO. Recently 29-30k has been more normal.

Like you, I see no reason to alter my prediction at this time.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

My overall take on this David guy is:

A) In the past CO has given out information to lawyers that turned out completely wrong. (This may have happened by design or not. We will never know).
B) Whatever this particular lawyer has said is so vague and so useless that it's a waste of time to even think about it.
C) The fact that somebody registers just to post this information doesn't pass the smell taste. I would consider it more credible if it had been come from somebody who we knew at least for a few months.

As per predictions ..... I feel just as comfortable with our current prediction since no new information is really available that changes anything.

p.s. - I did see sbhagwat's calculations. I think 40K for ROW is quite a stretch. 26K is usually where they come in at. However it is quite possible that EB3ROW may be moving to EB2 ... just like EB3IC.... but my guess is you have to simply think about it in the same proportion.... not more not less. e.g. If there is 3K indians moving to EB2 from EB3 and if EB3 backlog is 30K (just making this up) ... then the ratio is 10%. So apply the same over entire EB3 because Indians are no special in their desire to move to EB2. After you plug in real numbers .. that should reveal ROW migration to EB2. I am pretty sure that shouldn't exceed 5-6K max.

---

Q, for what it's worth, my intention was to share the information that I had received with the experts on this forum and nothing else.

In all honesty, I have been a silent observer of the forum for the last couple of months or so, and I can tell you for sure that I don't even come remotely close to the amount of knowledge that gurus like you, Spectator, MATT etc. have on this complex and confusing topic, which is why I usually just end up reading most of the time rather than posting. This is the first time I had something to contribute so I registered and shared immediately. Seems like sbhagwat was able to get the same information as well. I just thought I would explain myself so that it does not prevent other newbies from registering and posting any new information that they might have.

Lastly, from some of the other posts, it sounds like CO has made similar comments in the past without divulging complete information, and I certainly hope it is the case this time as well. Also, the attorney website has a breaking news section which seems to be updated with everything except their communication with CO, so I suspect there is something "fishy" about the whole thing, which is why we should probably not give too much weighting to the email correspondence from the attorney, as some of the other posters have suggested.

pseudonym, no worries and thanks really for sharing what you thought was valid information. If I were in your position - even I wouldn't know how credible the info would be!

Thanks again and all the best to you and hope to hear more from you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pseudonym

Q, for what it's worth, my intention was to share the information that I had received with the experts on this forum and nothing else.

In all honesty, I have been a silent observer of the forum for the last couple of months or so, and I can tell you for sure that I don't even come remotely close to the amount of knowledge that gurus like you, Spectator, MATT etc. have on this complex and confusing topic, which is why I usually just end up reading most of the time rather than posting. This is the first time I had something to contribute so I registered and shared immediately. Seems like sbhagwat was able to get the same information as well. I just thought I would explain myself so that it does not prevent other newbies from registering and posting any new information that they might have.

Lastly, from some of the other posts, it sounds like CO has made similar comments in the past without divulging complete information, and I certainly hope it is the case this time as well. Also, the attorney website has a breaking news section which seems to be updated with everything except their communication with CO, so I suspect there is something "fishy" about the whole thing, which is why we should probably not give too much weighting to the email correspondence from the attorney, as some of the other posters have suggested.

---

IMHO- immediate effect of CIR, new PERMS/I-140s for porting may halt for some time till the dust is settled, mainly US MS STEMS with more than 5 years experiance and still on EB3(there are tons of them). Why waste money now on PERM and other paper work

CO may get bold enough to make bring back dates as of last year, atleast in July-August

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pedro Gonzales

You give them too much credit.
I'll stick with the forum's near-consensus estimates for now.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bvsamrat

IMHO- immediate effect of CIR, new PERMS/I-140s for porting may halt for some time till the dust is settled, mainly US MS STEMS with more than 5 years experiance and still on EB3(there are tons of them). Why waste money now on PERM and other paper work

CO may get bold enough to make bring back dates as of last year, atleast in July-August

---

bvsamrat,

I'm not so sure.

I agree that CIR passing, or the prospect of it passing, will slow down people thinking about starting the porting process.

For FY2013, all porting approvals will be from people who have already completed the process or will do so shortly.

As far as I see, nothing in the Senate CIR proposal affects available visa numbers for FY2013, so CO will still only have 158k to play with for FY2013.

He can't set a Cut Off Date later than there are visas available and he can't over-use the allocation.

So I think it will be what it will be this FY.

In addition to the above, isnt there a review period of about 3 months after a bill becomes a law wherein the further details related to the implementation of the law are outlined? If that is true then the law will not take affect till 2014, assuming it passes in 3rd QTR this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by natvyas

In addition to the above, isnt there a review period of about 3 months after a bill becomes a law wherein the further details related to the implementation of the law are outlined? If that is true then the law will not take affect till 2014, assuming it passes in 3rd QTR this year.

---

Every law goes in to Federal Register for public feedback. Since most of the clauses are effective FY15, it doesn't matter. There's an extensive discussion here

No new trackitt approvals for EB2-I in past 15 days. What is happening?

Hi,

I note that in the CIR Bill as presented by the Senators, spouses and children are not included in the total EB visa quota of 140,000 and 40% goes to EB2.

If this Bill is passed without any substantial amendments, what will be the EB2 India priority date prediction by Dec. 2013?

Thanks!

vgraj1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spectator

bvsamrat,

I'm not so sure.

I agree that CIR passing, or the prospect of it passing, will slow down people thinking about starting the porting process.

For FY2013, all porting approvals will be from people who have already completed the process or will do so shortly.

As far as I see, nothing in the Senate CIR proposal affects available visa numbers for FY2013, so CO will still only have 158k to play with for FY2013.

He can't set a Cut Off Date later than there are visas available and he can't over-use the allocation.

So I think it will be what it will be this FY.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gc_soon

Another one,
http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussi...page/last_page

---

Another one on trackitt - EB2I - PD Jul 2009. There appears to be no other recent activity, however, received email from NVC. Positive sign? I sure hope so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vgraj1

Hi,

I note that in the CIR Bill as presented by the Senators, spouses and children are not included in the total EB visa quota of 140,000 and 40% goes to EB2.

If this Bill is passed without any substantial amendments, what will be the EB2 India priority date prediction by Dec. 2013?

Thanks!

vgraj1.

---

vgraj1,

Please read Spec's response below.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spectator

bvsamrat,

I'm not so sure.

I agree that CIR passing, or the prospect of it passing, will slow down people thinking about starting the porting process.

For FY2013, all porting approvals will be from people who have already completed the process or will do so shortly.

As far as I see, nothing in the Senate CIR proposal affects available visa numbers for FY2013, so CO will still only have 158k to play with for FY2013.

He can't set a Cut Off Date later than there are visas available and he can't over-use the allocation.

So I think it will be what it will be this FY.

---

But if the bill passes without any changes, CO could allot all future quota of FY14 in December 13 itself. As later, this quota would have no meaning and all EB1 numbers could spill over straight - Thiis is what I think. But big IF only if CIR passes w/o changes

In case the CIR Bill becomes law before Oct.1, 2013, I guess some of the new provisions, namely exclusion of EB1 and spouses/children from EB visa quota, will become effective immediately, although the visa recapture from 1993 to 2013 will take effect from Oct.1, 2014. Then 56,000 visas (excluding spouses/children) will become available for EB2 in FY 2014. Is this correct? In that scenario, what is the expected EB2I priority date movement by Dec. 2013?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by veni001

vgraj1,

Please read Spec's response below.

---

it will be atleast July before it is voted in the house. The Dept.'s affected by the bill, will then be allocated sometime, normally a few months, to change their internal processes. So the earliest some part of this bill will be effective will be October,2013.For this fiscal year, there will not be any changes irrespective of the fate of the bill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vgraj1

In case the CIR Bill becomes law before Oct.1, 2013, I guess some of the new provisions, namely exclusion of EB1 and spouses/children from EB visa quota, will become effective immediately, although the visa recapture from 1993 to 2013 will take effect from Oct.1, 2014. Then 56,000 visas (excluding spouses/children) will become available for EB2 in FY 2014. Is this correct? In that scenario, what is the expected EB2I priority date movement by Dec. 2013?

---

I am not talking about FY 2013, I am talking about FY 2014, as Dec. 2013 falls within FY 2014.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MATT2012

it will be atleast July before it is voted in the house. The Dept.'s affected by the bill, will then be allocated sometime, normally a few months, to change their internal processes. So the earliest some part of this bill will be effective will be October,2013.For this fiscal year, there will not be any changes irrespective of the fate of the bill.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vgraj1

I am not talking about FY 2013, I am talking about FY 2014, as Dec. 2013 falls within FY 2014.

---

Spec did put out a 120k number for the first fiscal year of implementation, and majority coming to EB2I please look at the CIR thread.

I am yet to follow CIR much, so did not make any detailed calculations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MATT2012

Spec did put out a 120k number for the first fiscal year of implementation, and majority coming to EB2I please look at the CIR thread.

I am yet to follow CIR much, so did not make any detailed calculations.

---

Long story short..IF
1. the cap related provisions are upheld through the process AND
2. the bill passes and gets signed in by Sep 30, 2013 THEN

EB2/3 will get 120K visas.

If either of those conditions are not met, there will be no benefit till Oct 2014 (assuming it passes). My personal belief as I've expressed in the CIR thread is that for PDs between June 2008 (or wherever we end up by end of this fiscal year) and March 2009, this bill will not provide any benefit.

Thanks Viz.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vizcard

Long story short..IF
1. the cap related provisions are upheld through the process AND
2. the bill passes and gets signed in by Sep 30, 2013 THEN

EB2/3 will get 120K visas.

If either of those conditions are not met, there will be no benefit till Oct 2014 (assuming it passes). My personal belief as I've expressed in the CIR thread is that for PDs between June 2008 (or wherever we end up by end of this fiscal year) and March 2009, this bill will not provide any benefit.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vizcard

My personal belief as I've expressed in the CIR thread is that for PDs between June 2008 (or wherever we end up by end of this fiscal year) and March 2009, this bill will not provide any benefit.

---

Vizcard,

FWIW, I agree that, unless a Section says it comes into effect immediately the Bill is passed, then the timelines are too tight for the provisions to come into effect until FY2015.

Just logistically, there is an awful lot that the various agencies would have to prepare in terms of revised paperwork and procedures. That can't happen overnight.

Your sentence probably should say "in FY2014". Clearly it is beneficial when the provisions do come into effect. I would not guarantee all those dates to be cleared even in FY2015 without CIR.

Someone in trackitt reports getting NVC fee notice for EB2-I PD March 2009.
User rajji.
http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussi...page/last_page

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gc_soon

Someone in trackitt reports getting NVC fee notice for EB2-I PD March 2009.
User rajji.
http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussi...page/last_page

---

gc_soon,

Thanks.

I also saw that post in the morning. Nothing unusual in that user's profile - which is good. Let's wait and see if few more people report that.

None of the calculation models on this forum support PD movement that far currently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gc_soon

Someone in trackitt reports getting NVC fee notice for EB2-I PD March 2009.
User rajji.
http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussi...page/last_page

---

This is an old post of Jan 2012.Bottom line is if CIR passes and they remove the dependent from count immediately,EB2 should be current.This is my opinion.

I am kind of optimistic about the passage of the CIR Bill before Sep.30 because it has bi-partisan support and President's commitment. If the bill becomes law on Oct.1, 2013, i.e. FY 2014, it will bring relief to all EB2/EB3ers waiting for years for their GC. It appears to me that as per Section 2305 of the CIR Bill, the exclusion of spouses and children from EB visa quota becomes effective immediately (i.e. not after one year).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by helooo

This is an old post of Jan 2012.Bottom line is if CIR passes and they remove the dependent from count immediately,EB2 should be current.This is my opinion.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by helooo

This is an old post of Jan 2012.Bottom line is if CIR passes and they remove the dependent from count immediately,EB2 should be current.This is my opinion.

---

Wasn't referring to the OP's message of the thread but if you scroll towards the end of the post, you would see the latest comment.

I did observe the case you mentioned, looks like a very genuine case. In a different case there was pre-adjudication, though interfiling happened when PD was not current. Also did see RFE for a case with PD 2008 end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gc_soon

Wasn't referring to the OP's message of the thread but if you scroll towards the end of the post, you would see the latest comment.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MATT2012

I did observe the case you mentioned, looks like a very genuine case. In a different case there was pre-adjudication, though interfiling happened when PD was not current. Also did see RFE for a case with PD 2008 end.

---

Thanks Matt. What does this indicate then? Is it really a good sign for PD movement?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vkkpnm

Thanks Matt. What does this indicate then? Is it really a good sign for PD movement?

---

if it is a forming trend, we will soon see many more cases getting mentioned. The reflection of any such trend can only be confirmed after the inventory report next month.

Irrespective of date moves or not, it is a good sign.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spectator

Your sentence probably should say "in FY2014". Clearly it is beneficial when the provisions do come into effect. I would not guarantee all those dates to be cleared even in FY2015 without CIR.

---

I would agree with those qualifiers. I personally believe there will be something that passes. There's a lot of bipartisan support and a lot less vehement opposition than in previous proposed legislation (debt ceiling, healthcare, guns, fiscal cliff, etc).

The question in my mind now is does the Boston bombing impact people's minds considering the suspects are technically legal immigrants. Good thing is that national security hasn't come up as an issue for CIR. Plus both Senators from Mass are Dems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vizcard

The question in my mind now is does the Boston bombing impact people's minds considering the suspects are technically legal immigrants. Good thing is that national security hasn't come up as an issue for CIR. Plus both Senators from Mass are Dems.

---

For that matter, almost e'body (except Red Indians) in this country is a legal immigrant.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SmileBaba

For that matter, almost e'body (except Red Indians) in this country is a legal immigrant.:)

---

I was just about to reply on similar lines :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SmileBaba

For that matter, almost e'body (except Red Indians) in this country is a legal immigrant.:)

---

That is a totally incorrect statement and a very loose definition of immigrant. Almost everybody is a descendent of an immigrant. I don't want to get in to technicalities but my point is if you are born in a country you are NOT an immigrant and like it or not, that's how most of the population sees it.

PS: "Red Indian" is politically incorrect word.

sometimes viz it is best to look at the spirit of the statement than the actual words! So in that sense it is understandable what smilebaba said! But you are right that once born here .. the person is not necessarily immigrant himself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vizcard

That is a totally incorrect statement and a very loose definition of immigrant. Almost everybody is a descendent of an immigrant. I don't want to get in to technicalities but my point is if you are born in a country you are NOT an immigrant and like it or not, that's how most of the population sees it.

PS: "Red Indian" is politically incorrect word.

---

The definition of an immigrant by Viz may be correct but the message what similebaba was trying to convey that based on Boston incident by an immigrant won't affect CIR and any similar bill/law as this country is a land of immigrants.