EB2-3 Predictions (Rather Calculations) - 2014

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YTeleven

He has to move the dates because there were NO EB2-ROW demand at that time. Now also the same sitution, there is NO EB2-ROW demand exists and it will NOT improve till the Q2 or even Q3. So there is NO other option other than relase those VISAs to EB2-I. You will understand what I'm saying when you see the Dec. / Jan. VB & DD comes out.

---

Lets consider that EB2-ROW has zero demand. Lets for simplicity consider that all categories other than EB2I have zero demand. Great !!! All spillover comes to EB2I. Now EB2I can get 25000 visas in FY2014.

With the current inventory, CO still has 8000 left in 2008, 14000 in 2009, and 4000 in 2010. He can still have 26000 pre-adj cases which can get visas. He was able to give approx 8000 visas in Aug 2013 and 8000 in Sep 2013 because there were pre-adj cases ready. To distribute 25000 visas, he would need only 4 months if he has pre-adj cases.

The above numbers are exaggeration... I am just trying to point out that with zero EB2-ROW demand, EB2I will get nice spillover. However, that does not require the CO to move the dates in the upcoming months. He usually tends to wait till the last quarter.

If he does move the dates, for god know what reason, I would be happy :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RGVJSR

Hello Kanmani,
U made it clear.Thanks. I was out of touch with this numbers for last 1 year. Your PD is few days (Jun 2009) from mine. Do you expect we will get PR in FY-2014. What is best case / worst case time (Month/Yr) ? Your expert thoughts ?
-RGV

---

I think we will get it by sept FY2014.

The closure COD june 2008 gave me mixed feelings, I was happy that my wishful thinking came true though I didn't participate in the calculations. If it were September 2008 in FY2013, the entire 2009 would have passed in FY2014. I wish and hope to get more spillover in 2014 than that of in 2013. It is too early to predict.

In my opinion CO just want to keep dates stable. Look at history for a minute. Opens flood gates with a huge forward movement to generate demand, then retrogress to a safer date, and keep moving forward there after until time for opening flood gates again. Numbers wise, no logic except CO knows there will be spill over from some where. Worst case if no category is expected to give any spillover, which is very unlikely, he can keep some cases pending for a month or two with some type of internal retrogession. But if porting numbers are too high, higher than last year or so, he may even move dates backwards first time.

Is it logical? may be not. But historically how much of CO's actions made perfect logical sense?

That's my take on what is going on here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jagan01

Lets consider that EB2-ROW has zero demand. Lets for simplicity consider that all categories other than EB2I have zero demand. Great !!! All spillover comes to EB2I. Now EB2I can get 25000 visas in FY2014.

With the current inventory, CO still has 8000 left in 2008, 14000 in 2009, and 4000 in 2010. He can still have 26000 pre-adj cases which can get visas. He was able to give approx 8000 visas in Aug 2013 and 8000 in Sep 2013 because there were pre-adj cases ready. To distribute 25000 visas, he would need only 4 months if he has pre-adj cases.

The above numbers are exaggeration... I am just trying to point out that with zero EB2-ROW demand, EB2I will get nice spillover. However, that does not require the CO to move the dates in the upcoming months. He usually tends to wait till the last quarter.

If he does move the dates, for god know what reason, I would be happy :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kanmani

I think we will get it by sept FY2014.

The closure COD june 2008 gave me mixed feelings, I was happy that my wishful thinking came true though I didn't participate in the calculations. If it were September 2008 in FY2013, the entire 2009 would have passed in FY2014. I wish and hope to get more spillover in 2014 than that of in 2013. It is too early to predict.

---

Hello Kanmani,

I didn't understand your statement " if it were Sep 2008 in FY2013 , the entire 2009 would have passed in 2014 " FY 2013 ended in June 2008 which is not far from Sep2008. I think we need 4000 for porting+pending before June 2008 + 8000 (Jul-Dec 2008)+7000 (Jan-June 2009) + 7000(Jul-Dec 2009) , so total 26,000 for EB2-I in FY 2014 which will be historically highest to expect. Correct me if I am wrong. Is my numbers reasonable ? Your comments please . Thanks again.

Note: I have assumed 12K demand for 2008 even though demand data Nov says 9000 because some may be ported during FY 2014.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gcq

CO cannot and will not allocate entire years's quota in first month - that is a fact supported by law and history.

---

Not to reopen a heated debate but, it is actually supported neither by history nor by law. The law only talks about annual and quarterly quotas for an entire category (EB2, altogether), not individual countries within that category.

And as to history, South Korea has used up more than its annual quota in the first two quarters in a couple of years. I couldn't find the relevant threads on trackitt at this time. I'll edit this post as soon as i do.

To those of you who think it's possible that the lack of approvals between Sep 20th and Sep 30th was purely coincidental, let me show you the # of EB2I approvals on trackitt by day. This is date of approval stamped on their I485 approval notice, not the day they updated their trackitt profile.

Oct 17 - 9
Oct 16 - 26
Oct 15 - 12
Oct 14 - 0
Oct 13 - 0
Oct 12 - 12
Oct 11 - 7
Oct 10 - 14
Oct 9 - 18
Oct 8 - 26
Oct 7 - 27
Oct 6 - 0
Oct 5 - 0
Oct 4 - 17
Oct 3 - 23
Oct 2 - 28
Oct 1 - 5
Sep 30 - 0
Sep 29 - 0
Sep 28 - 0
Sep 27 - 0
Sep 26 - 0
Sep 25 - 0
Sep 24 - 1
Sep 23 - 0
Sep 22 - 0
Sep 21 - 0
Sep 20 - 1
Sep 19 - 2
Sep 18 - 5
Sep 17 - 40
Sep 16 - 64
Sep 15 - 2
Sep 14 - 57
Sep 13 - 59
Sep 12 - 76
Sep 11 - 57
Sep 10 - 48
Sep 9 - 43
Sep 8 - 1
Sep 7 - 24
Sep 6 - 66
Sep 5 - 40
Sep 4 - 53
Sep 3 - 40
Sep 2 - 1
Sep 1 - 2

As you can see above, the bulk of the approvals were between Sep 3 and Sep 17, there were a few approvals until Sep 20, and then only 1 for the rest of the month. The approvals started up again but at about half the rate from Oct 1. The rumours of visa exhaustion started on Sep 18th. It would be a huge coincidence that visas allocated in FY2013, just happened to start getting approvals on Oct 1 with a 10 day lull in between. It is far more likely that these Oct approvals are from the 2014 quota. Whether the 224 trackitt approvals to date account for the entire annual quota or more is unknown, so whether QSP is in effect or not is unknown, but I am certain that the EB2I is using more than its usual monthly allocation in October.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PD2008AUG25

Why would he do this? two reasons:

1) He doesn't like to retrogress unless he really has to. This situation gives Eb2I few more months of sanity.
2) He wants to keep workload for adjudicators somewhat even across the quarters. Imagine madness if Q1 is very light because EB2I doesn't have numbers and EB2ROW doesn't have demand and Q4 is very hectic as they have now much more applications to process with goal of wasting no numbers.

---

Reason 3: Fairness - He really wants to give every original EB2I pre Jun 15, 2008 applicant his GC before retrogressing dates. He can't control USCIS's order of processing, and so he realizes many newcomers and post July 2013 porters will get their GCs too at the expense of some of the original EB2I applicants like tackle, so he wants to leave the dates current sufficiently long to get them their GCs.

RGV,

I just threw my words without any back up calculations. At this moment I think we may hardly cross june 2009 in FY14. As we know 2009 numbers are less than 2008, without even looking into real numbers , I was venting out the scenario which had not happened but if we supposedly ended up in sept'08, this june to sept '08 worth of numbers might push next year's CoD atleast 6 months ahead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pedro Gonzales

Reason 3: Fairness - He really wants to give every original EB2I pre Jun 15, 2008 applicant his GC before retrogressing dates. He can't control USCIS's order of processing, and so he realizes many newcomers and post July 2013 porters will get their GCs too at the expense of some of the original EB2I applicants like tackle, so he wants to leave the dates current sufficiently long to get them their GCs.

---

I like it!

does it say anywhere when CO can use remaining FB quota from last year?
Here is another theory...not sure if anyone has discussed this before, if someone already has, let me know i will delete my post. As from DD they know there is going to be at least 8000 visas available in 2014 for EB from FB. So as per law EB2 gets 2288 of those 8k for sure. since these numbers are not actually part of total original annual quota (40k). he can use them whenever he wants (in my understanding unless it is not allowed by law). And based on the low Eb2Row demand for months he may have decided to give 2288 (28.6% of 8000) +233(oct.) + 233 (nov.) = 2754 to EB2I. And that is how he is keeping the dates at June 2008 for EB2I (based on trackitt approvals these number is close) now for december he can still use quarterly spillover from the remaining FB visa (assigned to other EB categories) if he thinks they are not going to use those numbers in 1st quarter which is 25% of 3424 (Eb1+EB4+Eb5 from FB) (EB3 will use its 2288) = 856 + 233 (Dec.EB2 I regular) = 1089. and he can still keep the date at June 08 for December. So possibly he has 3843 (or 2987 if no quarterly SO of remaining FB visas) visas for Eb2I in the first quarter of 2014. does it make sense?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pedro Gonzales

Not to reopen a heated debate but, it is actually supported neither by history nor by law. The law only talks about annual and quarterly quotas for an entire category (EB2, altogether), not individual countries within that category.

And as to history, South Korea has used up more than its annual quota in the first two quarters in a couple of years. I couldn't find the relevant threads on trackitt at this time. I'll edit this post as soon as i do.

To those of you who think it's possible that the lack of approvals between Sep 20th and Sep 30th was purely coincidental, let me show you the # of EB2I approvals on trackitt by day. This is date of approval stamped on their I485 approval notice, not the day they updated their trackitt profile.

Oct 2 - 28
Oct 1 - 5
Sep 30 - 0
Sep 29 - 0
Sep 28 - 0
...
...
...


As you can see above, the bulk of the approvals were between Sep 3 and Sep 17, there were a few approvals until Sep 20, and then only 1 for the rest of the month. The approvals started up again but at about half the rate from Oct 1. The rumours of visa exhaustion started on Sep 18th. It would be a huge coincidence that visas allocated in FY2013, just happened to start getting approvals on Oct 1 with a 10 day lull in between. It is far more likely that these Oct approvals are from the 2014 quota. Whether the 224 trackitt approvals to date account for the entire annual quota or more is unknown, so whether QSP is in effect or not is unknown, but I am certain that the EB2I is using more than its usual monthly allocation in October.

---

Thanks for this post Pedro....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackbrown_890

does it say anywhere when CO can use remaining FB quota from last year?
Here is another theory...not sure if anyone has discussed this before, if someone already has, let me know i will delete my post. As from DD they know there is going to be at least 8000 visas available in 2014 for EB from FB. So as per law EB2 gets 2288 of those 8k for sure. since these numbers are not actually part of total original annual quota (40k). he can use them whenever he wants (in my understanding unless it is not allowed by law).

---

The 2.3K gets added to the 40K so whatever laws apply to the original 40K also govern the additional 2.3K. CO can't use them whenever he wants (outside of using them as QSP).

Thats not good for 2009 PD's. I dont like it. (:--

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kanmani

I like it!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by titanian

Thats not good for 2009 PD's. I dont like it. (:--

---

I don't like it as well... However, it looks like it is the most probable outcome. The dates will stay at June 2008 for a long time. Long enough to give GCs to all porters who filed in Aug/Sep 2013.

Trackitt data:
There have been 228 approvals in Oct 2013 out of which 56 are first time filers (Aug filers). Almost 25% of approvals are going to first time filers.

It is surprising that there is one person who is a first time Sep filer and got his GC approved.

On an average, it is not taking more than 2 months to give GCs to first time filers. If the dates stay the same for Dec 2013, then I am guessing most first time filers would have gotten their visas and used up a lot of spillover (QSP). The chances of dates to move into 2009 are getting slimmer according to me. Doesn't it sound like early 2009 might also not make it in FY 2014 ?

I hope I am wrong and dates at least move to mid 2009 in FY 2014.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pedro Gonzales

Not to reopen a heated debate but, it is actually supported neither by history nor by law. The law only talks about annual and quarterly quotas for an entire category (EB2, altogether), not individual countries within that category.

And as to history, South Korea has used up more than its annual quota in the first two quarters in a couple of years. I couldn't find the relevant threads on trackitt at this time. I'll edit this post as soon as i do.

To those of you who think it's possible that the lack of approvals between Sep 20th and Sep 30th was purely coincidental, let me show you the # of EB2I approvals on trackitt by day. This is date of approval stamped on their I485 approval notice, not the day they updated their trackitt profile.

........................................

As you can see above, the bulk of the approvals were between Sep 3 and Sep 17, there were a few approvals until Sep 20, and then only 1 for the rest of the month. The approvals started up again but at about half the rate from Oct 1. The rumours of visa exhaustion started on Sep 18th. It would be a huge coincidence that visas allocated in FY2013, just happened to start getting approvals on Oct 1 with a 10 day lull in between. It is far more likely that these Oct approvals are from the 2014 quota. Whether the 224 trackitt approvals to date account for the entire annual quota or more is unknown, so whether QSP is in effect or not is unknown, but I am certain that the EB2I is using more than its usual monthly allocation in October.

---

Pedro,

The part of my statement you quoted "CO cannot and will not allocate entire years's quota in first month - that is a fact supported by law and history." is explicitly supported by law. One of the members has quoted the law that states that.
When you say S. Korea used up more than its annual quota , S.Korea was not a retrogressed country for the year I mentioned. So applying country caps to S.Korea for that year is not valid. If I remember correctly, S.Korea had older PD and not subject to country caps. That accounted for heavy usage by S.Korea.

Trackitt is not a reliable source for tracking approvals. As Your chart already shows, only a miniscule percentage of approvals get reported on trackitt. When it comes to the end of September when approvals are anyways tapering off, chances of the approvals showing up on trackitt is NIL or close to it.

To reiterate again, I am not saying that all approvals from October are from 2013 quota. Oct has its own allocation and naturally some approvals could result from it. ( repeated this multiple times).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackbrown_890

does it say anywhere when CO can use remaining FB quota from last year?
Here is another theory...not sure if anyone has discussed this before, if someone already has, let me know i will delete my post. As from DD they know there is going to be at least 8000 visas available in 2014 for EB from FB. So as per law EB2 gets 2288 of those 8k for sure. since these numbers are not actually part of total original annual quota (40k). he can use them whenever he wants (in my understanding unless it is not allowed by law). And based on the low Eb2Row demand for months he may have decided to give 2288 (28.6% of 8000) +233(oct.) + 233 (nov.) = 2754 to EB2I. And that is how he is keeping the dates at June 2008 for EB2I (based on trackitt approvals these number is close) now for december he can still use quarterly spillover from the remaining FB visa (assigned to other EB categories) if he thinks they are not going to use those numbers in 1st quarter which is 25% of 3424 (Eb1+EB4+Eb5 from FB) (EB3 will use its 2288) = 856 + 233 (Dec.EB2 I regular) = 1089. and he can still keep the date at June 08 for December. So possibly he has 3843 (or 2987 if no quarterly SO of remaining FB visas) visas for Eb2I in the first quarter of 2014. does it make sense?

---

This sounds more realistic !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jagan01

I don't like it as well... However, it looks like it is the most probable outcome. The dates will stay at June 2008 for a long time. Long enough to give GCs to all porters who filed in Aug/Sep 2013.

Trackitt data:
There have been 228 approvals in Oct 2013 out of which 56 are first time filers (Aug filers). Almost 25% of approvals are going to first time filers.

It is surprising that there is one person who is a first time Sep filer and got his GC approved.

On an average, it is not taking more than 2 months to give GCs to first time filers. If the dates stay the same for Dec 2013, then I am guessing most first time filers would have gotten their visas and used up a lot of spillover (QSP). The chances of dates to move into 2009 are getting slimmer according to me. Doesn't it sound like early 2009 might also not make it in FY 2014 ?

I hope I am wrong and dates at least move to mid 2009 in FY 2014.

---

I have a June 2010 PD , your calculation already scare me. I am looking to change job , have offers , but just wondering if i have to do PERM and 140 one more time ( i have done 5 times already ). On a positive side i see it will take atleast 2015 to reach my PD, so i can tryout my luck with new job :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pedro Gonzales

The 2.3K gets added to the 40K so whatever laws apply to the original 40K also govern the additional 2.3K. CO can't use them whenever he wants (outside of using them as QSP).

---

Not true. Visas flowing over from FB to EB is not subject to country quota. Same rules don't apply.

GCQ - I am afraid - FB gives visas to EB category as a whole effectively creating a new EB category limit. Or stated otherwise - EB limit is defined as 140K plus whatever FB gives. Thus every single visa within that limit is subject to the % limits as laid out in INA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gcq

Not true. Visas flowing over from FB to EB is not subject to country quota. Same rules don't apply.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gcq

Are you saying this based on your understanding of INA ?

---

Q,
You maybe right in saying country quota still applies for FP spillover as per this link http://blog.mygcvisa.com/2013/02/eb-...dditional.html

I didn't refer to INA. However the above link has a good description of how FB to EB spillover works.
Basing on the above link, even if country cap is applicable, there are more visas per category. That means EB2-I ( or any other category) gets more visas per their original quota plus spillover as applicable under the laws. We surely don't know whether QSP is being applied. However EB2-I or any other category can get additional visas per quarter as a result of the spillover. That explains additional approvals in October if any.

Thanks gcq. Yes of course I said so based on my understanding of INA.

As per October extra approvals - I just dont see how QSP can be applied because by definition QSP is "unused visas" within category. So CO can't just say in week 1 of a quarter that "I think nobody is going to use thee visas and let me give it to retrogressed countries.". And if he does so - hypothetically - then that is not QSP. That is him doing his thing. Now if somebody wants to accuse him of doing just that - be CO's guest. I don't think that's happening at all. Whatever he did in 2012 had a very good reason - he had to build inventory. So he did what he had to do. Doesn't mean he is going to do it again ... at least not so soon. Perhaps next year.

The best explanation for any approvals is - late action by USCIS in actually closing the case, adjusting the status, printing the card, sending out to people, communicating etc. etc. Visa could've easily been granted in September.

Those interested in verifying this theory can easily do so by going to trackitt and checking all october approvals relative to november approvals for last 5 years. That will prove or disprove this theory. I clearly remember - I had done it a while back and seriously have no time to do it again. But I will be glad if somebody proves me wrong. I will learn a thing or too as well :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gcq

Q,
You maybe right in saying country quota still applies for FP spillover as per this link http://blog.mygcvisa.com/2013/02/eb-...dditional.html

I didn't refer to INA. However the above link has a good description of how FB to EB spillover works.
Basing on the above link, even if country cap is applicable, there are more visas per category. That means EB2-I ( or any other category) gets more visas per their original quota plus spillover as applicable under the laws. We surely don't know whether QSP is being applied. However EB2-I or any other category can get additional visas per quarter as a result of the spillover. That explains additional approvals in October if any.

---

Hi All - I am hoping someone can advise. My PD is Sep 30, 2008. I was moving jobs when my date became current in 2011 and by the time my new employer finished PERM and 140, dates retrogressed. Now, I am hopefully a year away from getting the elusive card and lo and behold hear that the new CEO wants to reclibrate job titles to meet industry standards! This may mean my title could change (although job description will remain the same and salary will be the same or higher) from the time my PERM was approved mid last year. What does this mean - hopefully not another PERM for title change which could effectively ruin my chances once again?? Considering it is taking 12 months for PERM and 140 these days, by the time Sep 30, 2008 becomes current again this time next year, I'd still be in the PERM process. So is a new PERM needed in my case and if yes are there amendment like options if any? Would appreciate some insights from the knowledgable folks here. Thanks much.

INA Section 201(d)

Worldwide level of employment-based immigrants

(1) The worldwide level of employment-based immigrants under this subsection for a fiscal year is equal to-

(A) 140,000 plus

(B) the number computed under paragraph (2).

Paragraph(2)

(C) The number computed under this paragraph for a subsequent fiscal year is the difference (if any) between the maximum number of visas which may be issued under section 203(a) (relating to family-sponsored immigrants) during the previous fiscal year and the number of visas issued under that section during that year.

That is, Every year worldwide EB total is 140,000 + unused FB of previous year

EMPLOYMENT - BASED PREFERENCES (From Visa bulletin)

First: Priority Workers: 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference level, plus any numbers not required for fourth and fifth preferences.

Second: Members of the Professions Holding Advanced Degrees or Persons of Exceptional Ability: 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference level, plus any numbers not required by first preference.

Third: Skilled Workers, Professionals, and Other Workers: 28.6% of the worldwide level, plus any numbers not required by first and second preferences, not more than 10,000 of which to "*Other Workers".

Fourth: Certain Special Immigrants: 7.1% of the worldwide level.

Fifth: Employment Creation: 7.1% of the worldwide level, not less than 3,000 of which reserved for investors in a targeted rural or high-unemployment area, and 3,000 set aside for investors in regional centers by Sec. 610 of Pub. L. 102-395.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gcq

Not true. Visas flowing over from FB to EB is not subject to country quota. Same rules don't apply.

---

Absolutely the same rules apply especially including country quota. A simple reading of the INA will show you as much. I don't have the time right now to pull the relevant sections, so I ask that you look at it on your own. If you are still of the opinion that they don't, I'll explain the details. But I request that you look through it once on your own if you haven't already.

Edit:- I see Kanmani has answered this in detail so I won't have to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gcq

Pedro,

The part of my statement you quoted "CO cannot and will not allocate entire years's quota in first month - that is a fact supported by law and history." is explicitly supported by law. One of the members has quoted the law that states that.

---

I will find that post this evening and respond. My read of the law is that there is no monthly quota, only quarterly quota, and that is only at a category level. It doesn't specify what is and isn't allowed for specific countries. And I used the S. Korea example (yes it was not retrogressed, that year) because that's the only one I've seen outside of the year-end spillovers. My read of the law is that there is no distinction between retrogressed and non retrogressed countries on this specific issue.

EDIT:- I went to the beginning of page 91 and could not find that post you are referring to. It can't refer to INS sections 201, 202 and 203, all of which I know quite well and can guarantee does not reference monthly allocations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gcq

Trackitt is not a reliable source for tracking approvals. As Your chart already shows, only a miniscule percentage of approvals get reported on trackitt. When it comes to the end of September when approvals are anyways tapering off, chances of the approvals showing up on trackitt is NIL or close to it.

To reiterate again, I am not saying that all approvals from October are from 2013 quota. Oct has its own allocation and naturally some approvals could result from it. ( repeated this multiple times).

---

I still disagree, unless your point is that the 2013 visa usage is a tiny % of the October approvals. I think that the vast majority, if not all of the October approvals are from the 2014 quota. While trackitt is a miniscule % of the total approvals, cumulative probability is a significant factor. The probability that there are approvals at large but none updated on trackitt is quite high, but the probability that this happens for 10 consecutive days is significantly lower. Especially, when you consider that it ticks up again exactly on October 1st. If the general trackitt populace is 5%, the probability of having 0s for 10 consecutive days followed by a hit on the 11th day is about 3%. Still a chance you are right, but not a big one.

Pedro,

I know you might have answered this in the past. I somehow cannot get to that post. I am a little confused about the process followed by the people porting from EB3 - EB2 after their I-485 has been filed. Can you please tell me what are the steps involved ? Do these people have to file a new I-485 ? Do they do PERM and I-140 again ? What is the exact process these so called interfile cases ?

The reason I am asking this question is that the numbers on trackitt are becoming increasingly confusing:
1. DD said that there were only around 1000 applications pending before June 15, 2008.
2. We have seen approximately 400 (~5500 in real world) new I-485 applications between Aug 2013 and Sep 2013. Out of these around 50 are approved (~700 in real world). So we still have around 4800 applications pending of people who filed between Aug and Sep 2013.
3. In Oct 2013, we have seen 250 approvals on trackitt. 50 come from first time filers. So 200 approvals for other applications that were filed before Aug 2013. 200 would map to ~3000 applications. According to the DD there were only 1000 known demand prior to June 15, 2008. How come we have approx 3000 approvals then.

I am just worried that the porting number might be bigger than 5-6k that everyone was predicting. Or I am seriously missing something here !!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pedro Gonzales

Absolutely the same rules apply especially including country quota. A simple reading of the INA will show you as much. I don't have the time right now to pull the relevant sections, so I ask that you look at it on your own. If you are still of the opinion that they don't, I'll explain the details. But I request that you look through it once on your own if you haven't already.

Edit:- I see Kanmani has answered this in detail so I won't have to.

---

I have conceded on that point in the post http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showth...4403#post44403

I did a quick referral on INA ( many relevant parts being familiar to me from me reading & analyzing it couple of years back)
I couldn't find an explicit statement describing country cap effect on FB spillover visas. The only way I could infer that country quota is applicable to spillover is to assume FB spillover just expands the quota, doesn't do anything else. However my common sense tells me otherwise for the following reasons.

1. Country cap is not being applied to fall-across spillover.
2. Even for FB spillover, the visas are allocated equally across categories( EB2, EB3 etc).

Considering the above factors I am inclined to believe that country quota doesn't apply for FB spillover.

However I have conceded to you argument based on the link I posted earlier and Q affirming he believes so.

INA doesn't force me to accept your view. The post by Kanmani just points to quota allocation, nothing more. If you have a specific link to INA that mentions how country-cap is applicable to FB spillovers, please let me know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jagan01

Pedro,

I know you might have answered this in the past. I somehow cannot get to that post. I am a little confused about the process followed by the people porting from EB3 - EB2 after their I-485 has been filed. Can you please tell me what are the steps involved ? Do these people have to file a new I-485 ? Do they do PERM and I-140 again ? What is the exact process these so called interfile cases ?

The reason I am asking this question is that the numbers on trackitt are becoming increasingly confusing:
1. DD said that there were only around 1000 applications pending before June 15, 2008.
2. We have seen approximately 400 (~5500 in real world) new I-485 applications between Aug 2013 and Sep 2013. Out of these around 50 are approved (~700 in real world). So we still have around 4800 applications pending of people who filed between Aug and Sep 2013.
3. In Oct 2013, we have seen 250 approvals on trackitt. 50 come from first time filers. So 200 approvals for other applications that were filed before Aug 2013. 200 would map to ~3000 applications. According to the DD there were only 1000 known demand prior to June 15, 2008. How come we have approx 3000 approvals then.

I am just worried that the porting number might be bigger than 5-6k that everyone was predicting. Or I am seriously missing something here !!!

---

The number of new applications is truly astounding. These dates were current in 2012 from Jan-April. Abig chunk of these may be EB2-EB2 portings who missed last time because they were probably changing companies. It'll be interesting to see how many new new applications were filed in October. Has the rate of fresh applications stayed the same or is it going down? At 5-6K porting dates should clear Dec-08 in FY14. But if porting increases further even that is a stretch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gcq

I have conceded on that point in the post http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showth...4403#post44403

I did a quick referral on INA ( many relevant parts being familiar to me from me reading & analyzing it couple of years back)
I couldn't find an explicit statement describing country cap effect on FB spillover visas. The only way I could infer that country quota is applicable to spillover is to assume FB spillover just expands the quota, doesn't do anything else. However my common sense tells me otherwise for the following reasons.

1. Country cap is not being applied to fall-across spillover.
2. Even for FB spillover, the visas are allocated equally across categories( EB2, EB3 etc).

Considering the above factors I am inclined to believe that country quota doesn't apply for FB spillover.

---

Yes, there is no direct comment on the FB spillover and country caps, but the INA is quite explicit that FB spillover merely expands worldwide allocations, and so any rules that apply to the worldwide allocations automatically capture the FB spillover too, and that was what Kanmani was trying to explain in her detailed post.

From your points 1 & 2 above, I think I understand the source of your misunderstanding. I believe you are a) thinking of the FB spillover as a separate category, it is not, and b) you are not considering that SOFAD is basically the only exception to the country caps as far as EB is concerned. In a year when there is SOFAD to EB2I, every extra visa number that spills over to EB2 from FB will go to EB2I, so effectively, it looks like it the FB spillover doesn't have country caps, but in fact, no such thing is happening. The FB spillover is merely increasing the SOFAD which is what doesn't have country caps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gcq

However I have conceded to you argument based on the link I posted earlier and Q affirming he believes so.

INA doesn't force me to accept your view. The post by Kanmani just points to quota allocation, nothing more. If you have a specific link to INA that mentions how country-cap is applicable to FB spillovers, please let me know.

---

Just semantics now, since we are in agreement on the core issue, but Kanmani's post does explain that the FB spillover expands the Worldwide level of employment-based immigrants from 140k for the year (to 148K for FY2014). Everything else flows from that, as she points to in the rest of her post.

Specifically, you may want to look at the country cap discussion in INA 202(a)(2), which reads:

Quote:

---

Subject to 1a/ paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed 7 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 2 percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.

---

Sections 203(a) and 203(b) refer to the EB and FB categories and each has a further breakup into the categories we have all come to know and love. Further on...

Quote:

---

(e) Special Rules for Countries at Ceiling. - If it is determined that the total number of immigrant visas made available under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area will exceed the numerical limitation specified in subsection (a)(2) in any fiscal year, in determining the allotment of immigrant visa numbers to natives under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203, visa numbers with respect to natives of that state or area shall be allocated (to the extent practicable and otherwise consistent with this section and section 203) in a manner so that

(1) the ratio of the visa numbers made available under section 203(a) to the visa numbers made available under section 203(b) is equal to the ratio of the worldwide level of immigration under section 201(c) to such level under section 201 (d);

(2) except as provided in subsection (a)(4), ....Vivek's comment: Ignore, refers to FB2A

(3) except as provided in subsection (a)(5), the proportion of the visa numbers made available under each of paragraphs (1) through (5) of section 203(b) is equal to the ratio of the total number of visas made available under the respective paragraph to the total number of visas made available under section 203(b).

---

202(a)(5) refers to SOFAD, and this item 202(e)(3) is what makes it clear that the country caps don't affect SOFAD.

I hope that makes it clear that the INA is what is driving our view (Kanmani's, Q's and mine).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jagan01

Pedro,

I know you might have answered this in the past. I somehow cannot get to that post. I am a little confused about the process followed by the people porting from EB3 - EB2 after their I-485 has been filed. Can you please tell me what are the steps involved ? Do these people have to file a new I-485 ? Do they do PERM and I-140 again ? What is the exact process these so called interfile cases ?

The reason I am asking this question is that the numbers on trackitt are becoming increasingly confusing:
1. DD said that there were only around 1000 applications pending before June 15, 2008.
2. We have seen approximately 400 (~5500 in real world) new I-485 applications between Aug 2013 and Sep 2013. Out of these around 50 are approved (~700 in real world). So we still have around 4800 applications pending of people who filed between Aug and Sep 2013.
3. In Oct 2013, we have seen 250 approvals on trackitt. 50 come from first time filers. So 200 approvals for other applications that were filed before Aug 2013. 200 would map to ~3000 applications. According to the DD there were only 1000 known demand prior to June 15, 2008. How come we have approx 3000 approvals then.

I am just worried that the porting number might be bigger than 5-6k that everyone was predicting. Or I am seriously missing something here !!!

---

Were you looking for this post? I dont' think it addresses your concern.

I'm not an expert on the issue but my belief is that it has to be preceded by both PERM and I-140 filings. Then, only when dates are current is the interfiling request sent (or a fresh I485 if no I485 has been applied for previously). Others here will correct me if I'm wrong.

The DD was based on data as of the 7th (End of Day I believe), so subtract out the 100 before then and you get to 250 - 100 - 50 = 100 that maps to the 1,000 known demand. Two possibilities, a) The 100 maps to the 1,000 so the trackitt representation is closer to 10% of the legacy filers, or b) the trackitt representation contineus at 6% but porters pre July 2007 PDs are continuing to interfile at about 400 in October thus far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pedro Gonzales

Were you looking for this post? I dont' think it addresses your concern.

I'm not an expert on the issue but my belief is that it has to be preceded by both PERM and I-140 filings. Then, only when dates are current is the interfiling request sent (or a fresh I485 if no I485 has been applied for previously). Others here will correct me if I'm wrong.

The DD was based on data as of the 7th (End of Day I believe), so subtract out the 100 before then and you get to 250 - 100 - 50 = 100 that maps to the 1,000 known demand. Two possibilities, a) The 100 maps to the 1,000 so the trackitt representation is closer to 10% of the legacy filers, or b) the trackitt representation contineus at 6% but porters pre July 2007 PDs are continuing to interfile at about 400 in October thus far.

---

Interfiling does require an approved PERM and I-140. It's basically starting a new GC process but you get to keep the old PD.

(I have my own views on retaining the old PD when porting but I'll keep them to myself now as its moot)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vizcard

Interfiling does require an approved PERM and I-140. It's basically starting a new GC process but you get to keep the old PD.

(I have my own views on retaining the old PD when porting but I'll keep them to myself now as its moot)

---

Does it require a new I-485 as well ?

I read somewhere in trackitt that the old I-485 (which was filed in first application) gets linked to the new I-140 ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pedro Gonzales

Were you looking for this post? I dont' think it addresses your concern.

I'm not an expert on the issue but my belief is that it has to be preceded by both PERM and I-140 filings. Then, only when dates are current is the interfiling request sent (or a fresh I485 if no I485 has been applied for previously). Others here will correct me if I'm wrong.

The DD was based on data as of the 7th (End of Day I believe), so subtract out the 100 before then and you get to 250 - 100 - 50 = 100 that maps to the 1,000 known demand. Two possibilities, a) The 100 maps to the 1,000 so the trackitt representation is closer to 10% of the legacy filers, or b) the trackitt representation contineus at 6% but porters pre July 2007 PDs are continuing to interfile at about 400 in October thus far.

---

So with the interfile request you do not need a new I-485 ?

If that is the case then surely porting is much higher than 6k that people were estimating. There are already 400+ applications on trackitt that have filed new I-485 in last two months. That potentially is 5500+ applications. And then if interfilers are not filing new I-485 then these would be at least another few thousand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jagan01

So with the interfile request you do not need a new I-485 ?

If that is the case then surely porting is much higher than 6k that people were estimating. There are already 400+ applications on trackitt that have filed new I-485 in last two months. That potentially is 5500+ applications. And then if interfilers are not filing new I-485 then these would be at least another few thousand.

---

An interfile request doesn't require a new I-485. USCIS recommends only one pending I-485 per Alien number. Period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jagan01

So with the interfile request you do not need a new I-485 ?

If that is the case then surely porting is much higher than 6k that people were estimating. There are already 400+ applications on trackitt that have filed new I-485 in last two months. That potentially is 5500+ applications. And then if interfilers are not filing new I-485 then these would be at least another few thousand.

---

Inter filers need a 485 if they never filed one before. Those with PD after July 2007 were never current and hence never filed a 485. So they would need to file new 485s. Inter filers after PD July 2007 are pretty much like new EB2 applicants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vizcard

Inter filers need a 485 if they never filed one before. Those with PD after July 2007 were never current and hence never filed a 485. So they would need to file new 485s. Inter filers after PD July 2007 are pretty much like new EB2 applicants.

---

Pedro, Kanmani, Viz, Q and other gurus:

Thanks for your replies.

I made the point earlier that there are 400+ applications on trackitt that have filed I-485 in Aug / Sep. That would be around 5500+ applkications. On top of that we have the other interfilers that do not have to file I-485.

I remember a previous conversation where people were saying that there would be more interfilers who have already filed I-485 compared to the ones that have not filed I-485.

That would mean a lot of interfilers that have not filed new I-485 and are still pending. What do you guys think that number is. I am thinking approximately 2k.

So essentially according to me there are 5+2+1 = 8k applications before June 2008. This looks scary enough and I do not know how people are predicting that dates can move to Mar 2009 and beyond. I think it is difficult to even move to Jan 2009?

Can someone please do some number crunching.
1. How many interfilers that filed first I-485 in Aug/Sep are pending according to you? My take 5500
2. How many interfilers that had originally filed I-485 and are just going to use the old I-485 are pending according to you? My take 2000
3. How many of the original EB2 applications that had filed I-485 in 2012 are pending according to you ? My take 500
4. How many more interfilers will we see every month? (This will increase the demand as long as dates don't go back)

The first time I-485 filers with eb2 I-140 Pd ported are not interfilers , they are one among the porters .

The term interfiler refers to those who already have I-485 applications with USCIS, and the applicants prefer to change their category by obtaining new Perm/I140 in due course , interfiling (link) their new I-140 with that of old the I-485.

Interfiling is an official term which is in use by USCIS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gcq

I have conceded on that point in the post http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showth...4403#post44403

I did a quick referral on INA ( many relevant parts being familiar to me from me reading & analyzing it couple of years back)
I couldn't find an explicit statement describing country cap effect on FB spillover visas. The only way I could infer that country quota is applicable to spillover is to assume FB spillover just expands the quota, doesn't do anything else. However my common sense tells me otherwise for the following reasons.

1. Country cap is not being applied to fall-across spillover.
2. Even for FB spillover, the visas are allocated equally across categories( EB2, EB3 etc).

Considering the above factors I am inclined to believe that country quota doesn't apply for FB spillover.

However I have conceded to you argument based on the link I posted earlier and Q affirming he believes so.

INA doesn't force me to accept your view. The post by Kanmani just points to quota allocation, nothing more. If you have a specific link to INA that mentions how country-cap is applicable to FB spillovers, please let me know.

---

gcq,

Actually there is no FB spillover exists!

Many users are unfamiliar with the forum usage terms like spillover/SOFAD/Fall-down/Fall-across gets confused. Spillover is a forum usage term, while INA uses the term Otherwise Unused Numbers (OUN).

There is nothing official with the term FB Spillover, some of us are using this for no reason. I recommend someone to comeup with a new term to refer Previous year's unused FB (for time being PvYr.FB)

Last year even before DoS's announcement, Spectator pointed out that 2012's unused FB (18k) was due for 2013 EB quota. Many rookies including myself thought 18k would go to retrogressed countries as spillover.(later realised the reality with the help of Spec).


As Pedro explained above, Previous year's unused FB alters the overall EB quota inturn alters the category allocation and per country limitation.

No provisions in INA specifies the direct allocation of unused visas to retrogressed countries. I/C gets these OUN only through fallacross within the EB2 category. No by-pass route from FB.

For example, If your Basic Pay is increased by 10% in the middle of the Tax year.

What will you do?

1. Calculate Fed tax, State tax, SStx accordingly by adding Basic Pay + 10%

2. Separate that 10% to pocket and pay only tax as per Basic pay amount.


The overall EB quota is as simple as that.

I stop here.

I was using a term "FB overflow" last year but "FB bonus" also works :). I think let's just call it what it is - unused FB.

I go with unused FB. Lets get other's approval too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sportsfan33

I think we need to revise the trackitt %. I don't think there are of the order 5K first time filers. Tottal cumulative demand including the interfilers before June 2008 should be a small enough number for the date to stay where it is.

---

Sports,

I do not think trackitt is more than 8%. There were 1259 approvals in Aug/Sep and we know from demand data that there were at least 16000 approvals minimum. It might be more than that. with 16000 mapping to 1259, we would have 7.8% representation in trackitt. Max 8%. It cannot be more than that.

So yes, trackitt % might not be the traditional 6% but it surely is not more than 8%.

Even with 8% representation, the figures look scary
1. First time I-485 filers since aug 2013 --> 413 --> 5162
2. The non-first time filers approved in Oct --> 263 - 57 = 206 --> 2575
3. Let us assume a best case that the 800 odd pending according to the DD before June 15, 2008 all got approved within this 2575 approvals that came in Oct.

This means already 2575 visas granted from FY2014. Another potential 5162 to be consumed by first time filers if dates continue to stay at June 2008.

I am afraid that with the dates staying at June 2008 for Dec bulletin, more than 7.5k visas would have been given out for the year and consumed by porters.

Also the 7.5k is the best case because of the below two points:
1. I am not even counting the new porters that would be porting as we speak.
2. I am assuming that the 2575 have drained all the interfile (people who do not need to file new I-485 and are porting) and the original 800 left out as per DD.

Realisitically, I think 10k will be eaten up from FY2014 by porters+pre June 2008 demand.

With less spillover predicted for FY2014, I do not see dates moving much even by the end of FY.