Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
spec,
I guess about 1000 approx. total approvals could be there so far with TSC slowing down to a point of dismal outlook. what percentage of the applications would never be touched ( based on history + pace of approvals).
I am seeing a pattern of earlier RD of TSC approving,
I applied in april 2012 and almost all the TSC approvals so far have applied jan 2012 or earlier, I think at TSC they might be considering RD
indiani,Quote:
Originally Posted by indiani
I think it equates to rather more than 1,000, because of the relatively high number of porting cases in the figures to date.
When you say "would never be touched" what exactly do you mean? Do you mean - would not be approved this year?
sorry, I should have been more clear. I meant "not approved " as they just aren't reviewed either because the visas are exhausted or they just don't get time to process or other reason ( not including the ones which are denied or RFE sent).Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
The reason why I am interested in the above prediction is to calculate my risk of not getting GC this fiscal. I am confident that once they review mine almost certainly they might approve but what I am worried about is the fact that they " never get chance to review mine".
I am hoping its less than 10%.
Indiani,Quote:
Originally Posted by indiani
Does it matter? Like I said in my previous post, ppl need to stop overreacting to what's happening. These are "micro trends" if we can even call them that. At the very least they are not indicative of what really will happen. It's just too small a sample set. My point is all this stress is not healthy. I understand the feeling of helplessness but if you feel the need to do something, reach out to your Congressman.
indiani,Quote:
Originally Posted by indiani
I tend to agree with vizcard.
FWIW, as I mentioned previously, a quick look at USCIS Inventory figures for October suggested that around 2k cases with PD that were current the previous FY remain. Of those, it is impossible to say how many might be new cases that would not have been adjudicated anyway and a proportion of the earliest cases might be "dead" cases.
Gurus,
I need some advice. My PD of Dec 2007 is current in August and yet to get approval. This forum is calm and mature like always, but reading chatter on other forums I'm getting worried about visas getting over, after September later PDs getting approved, etc.,. I dont want to wait for another year since I want to settle at one place to ensure continuity for kids education.
The colleagues I spoke to advised me to reach out to congressman immediately, one person contacted congressman on first day becoming current and got approved soon (this was few years back) and another person waited for 3 months and after nothing happened he contacted and got his GC in 2-3 weeks and that was what the congressman office had told him (this was last year). I know its sounding like the chain emails, I wrote the letter 100 times and I won lottery and someone did not write and lost his job... :-) but jokes apart its true and I know these two people from last 4-5 years.
In your experience does it help to raise SR and/or contact congressman? is there any downside?
There is no downside. I would raise the SR first and then contact the Congressman with that info as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by goforgreen
I think there are many including me in the process of contacting the congressman's office, calling L2 or opening SR might just confirm what you already know that your case is "being reviewed".( I already spoke to L2)Quote:
Originally Posted by goforgreen
As I mentioned in one of my previous post, the only people they( USCIS) are accountable to are representatives. while some might say that we will get approval whether we contact congressman or not, it certainly will not have any downside.
Thanks for the data, I think the DD and VB ( coming out in next week) might give more clues about where things are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
well vizcard, IT does matter if we are able to obtain data, which folks like spec can do. you are entitled to your opinion that I am over-reacting ( but I do not feel I am), if I could just sit back and wait and carry on with my life, perhaps I wouldn't even bother to visit any forums but unfortunately in my case the stakes are very high and risk calculation helps making decisions,Quote:
Originally Posted by vizcard
your point that its too small a sample set is well taken but at this point that's all we have .
Next week? I think both will come out on Friday.Quote:
Originally Posted by indiani
I don't know your personal situation so I can't comment on that. The simple answer is that you look at historic inventory data to get some sense of that. But my point is that you cannot control those dynamics. You should focus on what you can control.Quote:
Originally Posted by indiani
- talk to your congressman
- raise a SR
- make contingency plans based on the 3 possible outcomes (get it this FY, get it Q1 FY14, get it Q4 FY14)
As far as going to forums, I come here for the analysis and insight but a big reason to be part of a community that is going through similar issues. I also go to forums of my fav sports teams. I can't control how the team will play or if they win or lose but it's a lot of fun to be part of a group of die hard fans.
I recieved card production email today for primary as well as derivative
PD 19th dec 2007, RFE on june 14th 2013
Thanks for all your inputs
Congratulations Teja . Enjoy greenQuote:
Originally Posted by Teja9999
Indiani looks like they are touching RFE cases . Good luckQuote:
Originally Posted by indiani
Teja9999,Quote:
Originally Posted by Teja9999
Congratulations!
Congrats!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Teja9999
I was expecting more people giving the good news by now.
Congratulations Teja!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Teja9999
Congratulations Teja
Can I ask if you had ported from Eb3 ?
According to Trackitt, the answer is no.Quote:
Originally Posted by IJune05
Quote:
Received approval for both, EB2 dec 19th 2007, no porting , mass rfe on june 14th
Congrats Teja enjoy the green in hand :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Teja9999
TSC approvals are less compared to NSC. Also we know that TSC handles more cases than NSC.
Less approvals from TSC. Is it good for next bulletin?. This will lead CO to think numbers might get wasted if he does not move dates ahead. I know that it will generate random approvals depends on luck again. Gurus any comments.
I do think that the next date movement is already set, except final touches. Those final touches could only vary very little as current demand is known to CO. IMO, Nebraska approving very high number of interfile cases is a strategic move.Quote:
Originally Posted by pdmay2008
What is this strategy behind approving more interfiled cases?Quote:
Originally Posted by MATT2012
Matt could it be that interfiled cases with older PDs are getting approved and that NSC might have disproportionately higher interfiled cases compared to TSC resulting in disproportionate approvals?Quote:
Originally Posted by MATT2012
Nebraska's ratio of interfile cases is high, I could not find any other logical reason other than to help CO with the next month date movement. Within Nebraska center I expected to have an higher ratio when compared to the Texas ratio because Nebraska approved more cases last fiscal, but not as high as we are seeing in trackitt. The other scenario is, we were wrong with interfile estimates, that will seriously affect next months movement. But as Spec pointed out in one of his posts, it is too early for the overall pattern to form, especially with the approval slowdown in TSC.Quote:
Originally Posted by fountainhead
The strategy might be to avoid retrogression into 2005/2006 etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by fountainhead
Most of the interfile cases have older PDs and therefore it makes sense to clear them prior to the cases with later PDs. The CO might want to ensure that everyone with PD before 2007 is approved, so that eventually when the visa numbers run out the EB2I date stays somewhere in mid 2007. It makes sense to give approvals based on PD anyways.
Hi Q,
Yes, But 60:40 split between Interfiles: Direct is very high. The older PD logic is correct. But as per Visa allocation process document, latest by August 1st all cases in DD until Jan01,2008 may have been allocated a visa. Considering time for approval of interfile cases equal to direct cases, there should be a higher number of direct cases approved. if I consider all Interfiles were in Demand( I don't), it should be 1:2(interfiles: Direct) , going by 2500 cases before 2007 and 5000+ cases in 2007. Even with 5000 porting approvals between Aug and Sep, the over all ratio should only be 1.25: 2, as of now the overall ratio is 1:1 . I am sincerely hoping by next week or so more individual update trackitt and we get some reasonable ratios.
Congrattts Teja... You surely are looking forward to a thrilling weekend...Quote:
Originally Posted by Teja9999
We already know from CO's previous comments that he believes "upgrades" in a given year are very high. Last year, he mentioned a figure of 10-15k a year for all Countries, while admitting that neither DOS nor USCIS kept any figures.
This year is not a normal year and numbers are likely to be higher than usual due to retrogression last year in EB2.
My worry would be that seeing a high number of approvals with early PDs in early August will merely reinforce CO's opinion about the high number of "upgrades" and that would make him more conservative in the COD movement.
As for TSC, I have not seen any evidence why they would have less "upgrades" as a % of total approvals and I can't think of a good reason why that should be the case either. CO knows they will come on-stream at some point and must bear that in mind.
Matt, let's take it a little slowly please.Quote:
Originally Posted by MATT2012
Are you saying that the NSC is trying to help CO justify a greater movement next month than otherwise justifiable, or a lesser movement? And how do we get there by a disproportionately higher approval proportion for interfiles?
Pedro,Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedro Gonzales
Sorry that I did not communicate properly. hope the below explanation helps..
From CO's point of view Interfile cases is the dark box. Though I believe that there is lack of communication between the two agencies, I think that they do have frequent meetings to understand trends. There used to be a weekly meeting before between the agencies, I am not sure whether it is followed even now, or what is discussed. it is still little unclear to me why USCIS cannot provide a count of interfile cases, it may not be exact but an approximate.
CO has mentioned several times that he don't have any visibility to interfile cases, the least USCIS can do now is to process maximum number of interfile cases before DD is compiled and give an approximate range of pending interfile cases. if they have at least minimum understanding between them, they would be able to make Sept movement more accurate. I am not sure whether that will impact favorably or adversely, but being accurate is better, with a minimum margin of error as nothing is stopping USCIS from actively processing interfile cases.
Speaking about strategies, I do think that both USCIS and DoS have some common strategies and at times totally different political strategies too. I could notice some strategies applied in EB2ROW approval pattern this fiscal.
Cheers!!
Matt
Spec,Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
I do think that TSC ratio of approvals to application was low last year, when compared to NSC ratio. As there is a higher weightage of last year applications in TSC, the interfile: direct ratio this year could be different in Texas. That is what I remember from last year.
Cheers!!
Matt
Hi Spec,Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
I thought that the interfile cases always figured in the demand. Let us consider an application by someone in EB3 with PD Apr 2006. If that was interfiled with EB2 as the new category won't it be in the demand data?
If it was in demand data than CO already knew about these cases.
I believe the attempt is to go sequentially based on PDs and that would give him the best estimates as well as a chance to clear the older PDs. This also indirectly means that dates will not retrogress into 2005/2006 and will stay in 2007/2008.
Jagan,Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagan01
The final part of what people call Interfiling is the conversion of the basis of the I-485 from the approved EB3 I-140 to the newly approved EB2 I-140.
That Conversion cannot take place until the PD for the new basis (EB2) is Current (source:- USCIS AFM).
For any cases with a PD of September 01, 2004 or later where the process completed after May 2012, the PD was never Current again until August 01, 2013.
Without the Conversion step, a visa could never have been requested under EB2 and the case would still show under EB3 in the Demand Data. When the case is approved, eventually the EB3 case will disappear from the EB3 Demand, although how long that takes is uncertain.
NO it is straight forward EB2, Thanks for all your wishes, Big relief
The inter files are technically in the demand data but in the wrong category. As Spec points out, the actual inter filing cannot happen until dates are current. However, those cases are already a part of EB3 demand.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagan01
Hi Spec,Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Thanks for the detailed explanation. With your detailed explanation, the theory that giving GC to interfile cases is done in order to prevent the dates from retrogressing into 2006 is further strengthened.
Lets consider that GC were given on the basis of Receipt Date and not PD. If we had 5000 interfile applications with earlier PD and 5000 direct applications then it might be possible that 1000 interfilers get approved and 4000 direct applications. In that case there might be a scenario that many interfile applications with PD 2006 might be left out and it may well be around 2000. Then when the first demand data is released in the new year, we would see 2000 pending for the year 2006. CO can only allocate approx 300 a month which means he will have to move the date back to somewhere in 2006.
Lets consider the other scenario that GC are allotted based on PD. This would mean that entire 2005 and 2006 gets drained. Though the demand data would have more outstanding in 2007 and 2008, it still gives the CO the chance to keep EB2 India dates to 2007/2008.
Overall, I agree with your conclusion that it is detrimental for Sept visa bulletin. However, in the longer term it is advantageous as dates would not retrogress as much giving more chances for people to file 485 and get EAD.
On trackitt there is discussion saying visas might be getting exhausted? Is that a possibility so early in August?