EB2-3 Predictions (Rather Calculations) 2015-2020

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spectator

What appears have happened previously, is that CO did not retrogress EB1 quickly enough, allowing EB1 to use more visas than their allocation.
Since both the late retrogression of EB1-China and EB1-India and the non retrogression of EB1 as a whole covered a period of one month worth of visa issuances, then it could be said to be accidental and unforeseen, even though technically unlawful.

---

I don't get this, just because EB1 Final Action dates had been moved into the future beyond available numbers and not retrogressed soon enough and those EB1 folks were given visas beyond their legal quota logic, but the same was not applied to EB3 and stolen from them does not make any sense at all.

My question at this time is what should CO do to ensure that EB3 numbers don't get wasted or siphoned off to other categories, as it is obvious from the latest Inventory that EB3 demand is not sufficient to fill out the quota in FY2018.

I've given a very simplified explanation. I think it is more nuanced than that.

It's very probable that EB1 had not used their full allocation as September 2017 started and CO may have thought any retrogression was unnecessary. If USCIS then processed more cases than expected and/or Consular returns were lower than average, then it is possible to overshoot.

It also depends on USCIS actually adjudicating EB3 cases of all types. If they either chose not to, or simply didn't have enough cases ready to be adjudicated then it is what it is. It's also possible Consular returns were higher than expected.

Too many possibles to know what actually happened.

What I will say is that USCIS is probably the villain here. They are sending out RFE requests too late and, by not allowing Filing Dates to be used, creating a situation where CO has no visibility of upcoming demand.

Now that the whole adjudication / interview process is so long, it's even more important to create a buffer and have cases preadjudicated and ready to use unexpected extra visas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spectator

What I will say is that USCIS is probably the villain here. They are sending out RFE requests too late and, by not allowing Filing Dates to be used, creating a situation where CO has no visibility of upcoming demand..

---

If that is the case, then CO can push Final Action dates to Jan 2008 and let USCIS deal with the fall out, which may not be much as they are already generating RFE for Aug 2007. At least it will give both USCIS and DOS a handle on the demand within 3 months of advancing the Dates.

Exactly, I agree with you 'Harepath..' and apologies to Spec as I rarely disagree with you as you are awesome in your expertise, calculation, knowledge in this area and I respect/admire you for that. But on this one, I dont agree with Spec. Consider from a lay man's perspective who is on EB3 waiting in queue for last 13/14 years for GC, his kids are suffering because of this miscalculation between CO/USCIS and these two will keep blaming each other. Truely speaking, I think its hand in gloves and I think its a crime to do this kind of miscalculation like they did last time. And I wont be surprised if they do it this time again and repeat the same mistake (I hope I am wrong on this). Why should always EB2/EB3I folks need to suffer for their mistake (at the expense of other visa categories who will current sooner or later this way or that way in the next few months anyway) when they are already lagging behind by years and waiting in queue quietly for last 10/15 years. I think its criminal to do this and they should do something to correct it, but unfortunately they are not answerable to anyone.... thats why I said I wont be surprised if they repeat the same mistake again (only next few months will tell).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarepathekaIntezar

If that is the case, then CO can push Final Action dates to Jan 2008 and let USCIS deal with the fall out, which may not be much as they are already generating RFE for Aug 2007. At least it will give both USCIS and DOS a handle on the demand within 3 months of advancing the Dates.

Spec..
What I will say is that USCIS is probably the villain here. They are sending out RFE requests too late and, by not allowing Filing Dates to be used, creating a situation where CO has no visibility of upcoming demand..

---

After looking at this drama for more than a decade, it seems DoS and USCIS work hand in glove together to deny every opportunity to EB-India.

The whole idea of filing dates is a creative idea to stop Indians from even filing and getting associated benefits e.g. portability. The only realistic hope for EB-India is abolition of country quota. Either through legislation or through a legal fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hope21

Consider from a lay man's perspective who is on EB3 waiting in queue for last 13/14 years for GC, his kids are suffering because of this miscalculation between CO/USCIS and these two will keep blaming each other. and waiting in queue quietly for last 10/15 years.

---

I guess CO and USCIS know that when we waited for so many years silently we will wait for few more year. Also now EB2 has reached the 10 year queue waiting for GCs and by next year they will be in that block for EADs and 485s too.

Here is my take on recent 485 inventory report.
The system is correcting itself, if I were CO I would move the EB3-I dates to mid 2008 and make both EB3-India & EB2-India current dates equall.
This is January's report today is March 5th I strongly believe the system might have already put the CO in tight spot by now.
If he don't act now he will end up wasting 5k+ EB3 visas this year which might cost him heavily.

I'd had half expected CO to move the FAD for EB3-I before now, since USCIS will not accept Filing Dates, but I think that was probably rather naive of me.

I think it says something about the level of fear (even at fairly senior levels) among government workers under this administration.

I know people who work for federal agencies (not State or DHS) and this is the truth of the matter.

This administration is deeply anti-immigrant and DHS clearly has the upper hand versus DOS.

I don't expect much to happen until very late on, when it is too late anyway (it probably already is).

CO will work to ensure that the part he controls (Consular Processing) is as effective as possible. I don't think he has any power to persuade USCIS (DHS) to do their part.

Spec - whose idea it is to introduce Filing Date and what purpose it serves other than delaying people's ability to get AC21 benefits?

Why should backlogged folks believe that DHS is responsible for this new trick when the whole VB is controlled by DoS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spectator

CO will work to ensure that the part he controls (Consular Processing) is as effective as possible. I don't think he has any power to persuade USCIS (DHS) to do their part.

---

Wow Spec - well said. You are usually guarded in your comments - its quite something to see you call out the administration like this. You are absolutely right of course.

I am actually quite concerned that USCIS will go on to start denying cases on minor technicalities just so as to seem to align with administration's priorities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spectator

I'd had half expected CO to move the FAD for EB3-I before now, since USCIS will not accept Filing Dates, but I think that was probably rather naive of me.

I think it says something about the level of fear (even at fairly senior levels) among government workers under this administration.

I know people who work for federal agencies (not State or DHS) and this is the truth of the matter.

This administration is deeply anti-immigrant and DHS clearly has the upper hand versus DOS.

I don't expect much to happen until very late on, when it is too late anyway (it probably already is).

CO will work to ensure that the part he controls (Consular Processing) is as effective as possible. I don't think he has any power to persuade USCIS (DHS) to do their part.

---

Lets not get into arguments among ourselves on which part of the administration is most evil. I think CO is surely a little better behaved than DHS/USCIS - emphasis on little.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Spec - whose idea it is to introduce Filing Date and what purpose it serves other than delaying people's ability to get AC21 benefits?

Why should backlogged folks believe that DHS is responsible for this new trick when the whole VB is controlled by DoS.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imdeng

Lets not get into arguments among ourselves on which part of the administration is most evil. I think CO is surely a little better behaved than DHS/USCIS - emphasis on little.

---

Not arguing.. just trying to get a sense where this whole idea of 485 filing dates came from and what is the rationale and utility other than preventing immigrants from filing 485 ASAP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YTeleven

Here is my take on recent 485 inventory report.
The system is correcting itself, if I were CO I would move the EB3-I dates to mid 2008 and make both EB3-India & EB2-India current dates equall.
This is January's report today is March 5th I strongly believe the system might have already put the CO in tight spot by now.
If he don't act now he will end up wasting 5k+ EB3 visas this year which might cost him heavily.

---

Can you do us the favor of creating 2 of these charts - one for EB3 and one for EB2?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B89...lnaGdrSmM/edit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Spec - whose idea it is to introduce Filing Date and what purpose it serves other than delaying people's ability to get AC21 benefits?

Why should backlogged folks believe that DHS is responsible for this new trick when the whole VB is controlled by DoS.

---

Q,

The salient point is that the WHOLE VB is not controlled by DOS any longer.

The new system didn't introduce any change in procedure for DOS, other than the Filing Dates are now published.

DOS always had a date which they gave to NVC to start collecting documents for Consular Processing applicants ahead of the PD becoming current. The idea was that when the PD did become current, all that was required was a consular interview, which could be scheduled immediately.

The aim of Filing Dates was to confer the same advantage to AOS applicants.

As you are aware, when DOS first published the Filings Dates, USCIS threw a hissy fit and forced a new Visa Bulletin with much earlier Filing Dates.

In addition, USCIS forced a change whereby USCIS could decide independently of DOS whether to honor the Filing Dates for AOS cases.

As envisioned, the new system should have allowed people to file an I-485 much earlier (other than the wild swings when inventory ran out) and avail themselves of all the AC21 benefits you allude to. When the PD became current, approvals should have been faster, since background checks could have been completed and the case preadjudicated. A big benefit was visibility of the upcoming demand and predictable movement of the Final Action Dates.

Now USCIS have total power over AOS applications, they appear to have decided to kill the concept of Filing Dates and the benefits they could potentially confer. Instead of the advantages, the situation is even worse - no predictability, no visibility of demand and a lessened ability to move Final Action Dates forward by large amounts. Remember, when USCIS fails to honor Filing Dates, they are explicitly saying:

Quote:

---

When USCIS determines that there are more immigrant visas available for the fiscal year than there are known applicants for such visas, USCIS will state on its website that applicants may instead use the “Dates for Filing Visa Applications” charts in this Bulletin.

---

DOS only have power over the Final Action Dates. To make large Filing Date movements, DOS now has to imply that USCIS is lying. Moving those forward large amounts has consequences - consequences the concept of Filing Dates was supposed to make sure didn't happen.

I understand your perspective Spec. But when everyone knows this kind of foul play is happening (by USCIS), why is CO not playing the same card which USCIS is playing. I mean everyone knows CO/DOS can control Final Action Dates, why CO is not moving Final Action Dates far enough until 1 Jan 2018 for EB3I (Filing dates for EB3I which is useless at this time because they are not accepting new filings). By doing that, CO will be within his jurisdiction,and will not be crossing Filing date and will be within law. He will see the numbers/inventory until 1 Jan, 2018 and if needed, can retrogress the Final Action dates in next couple of months if demand is more than visas (as it used to happen previously when there were no Filing dates concept). If he is not doing that, dont you think he is helping USCIS indirectly and sitting in the same bucket as USCIS and thus helping USCIS in their motive (in screwing law abiding/innocent folks of EB3/EB2I, denying them any opportunity which can make their life just a little bit better), thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spectator

Now USCIS have total power over AOS applications, they appear to have decided to kill the concept of Filing Dates and the benefits they could potentially confer. Instead of the advantages, the situation is even worse - no predictability, no visibility of demand and a lessened ability to move Final Action Dates forward by large amounts. Remember, when USCIS fails to honor Filing Dates, they are explicitly saying:


DOS only have power over the Final Action Dates. To make large Filing Date movements, DOS now has to imply that USCIS is lying. Moving those forward large amounts has consequences - consequences the concept of Filing Dates was supposed to make sure didn't happen.

---

hope21,

Read my previous post about the DOS/DHS dynamics at present.

Spec/qesehmk/imdeng, So we should be hope for
1. EB2I/EB3I - Dates movement in Q3 rather than in Q4 for full allocation and SO (to avoid mis allocation) right?
2. Cut off Date for EB1 as early as possible (in Q3).
3. How much spill over are you expecting this FY? I am expecting total of 9K visas to EB2I & EB3I.
4. Do you think Jan I485 inventory is correct? The numbers looked inconsistent from previous inventory data. If the numbers are correct and FD dates are cleared in FY then EB2 inventory of 7500 for 2008 will be cleared and will give hope for better dates movement in next FY or next next FY (sad but that sounds like hope).

Thanks!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GCdreamz

4. Do you think Jan I485 inventory is correct? The numbers looked inconsistent from previous inventory data.

---

The Inventory figures for EB2-I recently are extremely frustrating!

Here's the numbers for 2008 to 2010 PD for EB2-I over recent Inventory Reports.

Inventory --- 2008 ---- 2009 ---- 2010
Jan-18 ----- 7,557 --- 8,757 --- 1,754
Oct-17 ----- 8,258 --- 8,820 --- 1,763
Aug-17 ----- 1,998 -- 11,708 --- 4,725
Apr-17 ----- 7,839 --- 9,092 --- 1,770
Jan-17 ----- 2,267 -- 12,118 --- 4,748
Oct-16 ----- 2,279 -- 11,377 --- 4,787
Apr-16 ----- 2,225 -- 10,938 --- 4,728
Jan-16 ----- 2,650 -- 10,980 --- 4,761
Oct-15 ----- 2,380 -- 10,040 --- 4,768

All the way back to May 2012, the 2010 figure has been in high 4kish territory. A 2010 PD has never been current since April 2012.

It doesn't seem sensible that less than 2k applications for a PD in Jan-Apr 2010 were received in the 2 months the dates were current.

No month in 2009 has been current since October 2014.

Only in the last year have the figures fluctuated.

If 2008 truly still had >7k applications pending at the end of December 2017, then it doesn't seem possible for EB2-I to have a FAD of late 2008.

If you adjust the 2009 and 2010 figures up to the previous level, then 2008 has around 1.6k applications pending.

There were about 1k reductions in the EB2-I inventory in Q1 FY2018.

But, given the figures look wrong for 2008 - 2010, how trustworthy are any of the EB2-I figures in the current (or recent) inventory(s)?

I conclude the figures are extremely likely incorrect, but don't know what they should be with any certainty.

I think I'm just stating what most people believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spectator

The Inventory figures for EB2-I recently are extremely frustrating!

Here's the numbers for 2008 to 2010 PD for EB2-I over recent Inventory Reports.

Inventory --- 2008 ---- 2009 ---- 2010
Jan-18 ----- 7,557 --- 8,757 --- 1,754
Oct-17 ----- 8,258 --- 8,820 --- 1,763
Aug-17 ----- 1,998 -- 11,708 --- 4,725
Apr-17 ----- 7,839 --- 9,092 --- 1,770
Jan-17 ----- 2,267 -- 12,118 --- 4,748
Oct-16 ----- 2,279 -- 11,377 --- 4,787
Apr-16 ----- 2,225 -- 10,938 --- 4,728
Jan-16 ----- 2,650 -- 10,980 --- 4,761
Oct-15 ----- 2,380 -- 10,040 --- 4,768

All the way back to May 2012, the 2010 figure has been in high 4kish territory. A 2010 PD has never been current since April 2012.

It doesn't seem sensible that less than 2k applications for a PD in Jan-Apr 2010 were received in the 2 months the dates were current.

No month in 2009 has been current since October 2014.

Only in the last year have the figures fluctuated.

If 2008 truly still had >7k applications pending at the end of December 2017, then it doesn't seem possible for EB2-I to have a FAD of late 2008.

If you adjust the 2009 and 2010 figures up to the previous level, then 2008 has around 1.6k applications pending.

There were about 1k reductions in the EB2-I inventory in Q1 FY2018.

But, given the figures look wrong for 2008 - 2010, how trustworthy are any of the EB2-I figures in the current (or recent) inventory(s)?

I conclude the figures are extremely likely incorrect, but don't know what they should be with any certainty.

I think I'm just stating what most people believe.

---

Thanks Spec!

Hi Spec

Thank you for a painstaking response.

The reality of backlogged people is that prior to the concept of "Filing Dates" the AOS candidates could file 485 ASAP and obtain AC21 benefits much sooner. Now they are robbed of that.

I respectfully disagree that VB is partially controlled by USCIS. USCIS did announce that they will not honor the Filing Dates. But they could only announce it when the mechanism appeared on the horizon. Earlier they had no basis to say such a thing.

If my memory is right, this change started under OBAMA administration. So while Trump admin is clearly anti-immigrant, I think when it comes to EB immigrants - there really isn't much difference because EB applicants do not wield political influence but their employers do. So it is much easier to maintain status quo or worsen it.

And that's exactly what we are seeing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spectator

Q,

The salient point is that the WHOLE VB is not controlled by DOS any longer.

The new system didn't introduce any change in procedure for DOS, other than the Filing Dates are now published.

DOS always had a date which they gave to NVC to start collecting documents for Consular Processing applicants ahead of the PD becoming current. The idea was that when the PD did become current, all that was required was a consular interview, which could be scheduled immediately.

The aim of Filing Dates was to confer the same advantage to AOS applicants.

As you are aware, when DOS first published the Filings Dates, USCIS threw a hissy fit and forced a new Visa Bulletin with much earlier Filing Dates.

In addition, USCIS forced a change whereby USCIS could decide independently of DOS whether to honor the Filing Dates for AOS cases.

As envisioned, the new system should have allowed people to file an I-485 much earlier (other than the wild swings when inventory ran out) and avail themselves of all the AC21 benefits you allude to. When the PD became current, approvals should have been faster, since background checks could have been completed and the case preadjudicated. A big benefit was visibility of the upcoming demand and predictable movement of the Final Action Dates.

Now USCIS have total power over AOS applications, they appear to have decided to kill the concept of Filing Dates and the benefits they could potentially confer. Instead of the advantages, the situation is even worse - no predictability, no visibility of demand and a lessened ability to move Final Action Dates forward by large amounts. Remember, when USCIS fails to honor Filing Dates, they are explicitly saying:



DOS only have power over the Final Action Dates. To make large Filing Date movements, DOS now has to imply that USCIS is lying. Moving those forward large amounts has consequences - consequences the concept of Filing Dates was supposed to make sure didn't happen.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spectator

The Inventory figures for EB2-I recently are extremely frustrating!

Here's the numbers for 2008 to 2010 PD for EB2-I over recent Inventory Reports.

Inventory --- 2008 ---- 2009 ---- 2010
Jan-18 ----- 7,557 --- 8,757 --- 1,754
Oct-17 ----- 8,258 --- 8,820 --- 1,763
Aug-17 ----- 1,998 -- 11,708 --- 4,725
Apr-17 ----- 7,839 --- 9,092 --- 1,770
Jan-17 ----- 2,267 -- 12,118 --- 4,748
Oct-16 ----- 2,279 -- 11,377 --- 4,787
Apr-16 ----- 2,225 -- 10,938 --- 4,728
Jan-16 ----- 2,650 -- 10,980 --- 4,761
Oct-15 ----- 2,380 -- 10,040 --- 4,768

All the way back to May 2012, the 2010 figure has been in high 4kish territory. A 2010 PD has never been current since April 2012.

It doesn't seem sensible that less than 2k applications for a PD in Jan-Apr 2010 were received in the 2 months the dates were current.

No month in 2009 has been current since October 2014.

Only in the last year have the figures fluctuated.

If 2008 truly still had >7k applications pending at the end of December 2017, then it doesn't seem possible for EB2-I to have a FAD of late 2008.

If you adjust the 2009 and 2010 figures up to the previous level, then 2008 has around 1.6k applications pending.

There were about 1k reductions in the EB2-I inventory in Q1 FY2018.

But, given the figures look wrong for 2008 - 2010, how trustworthy are any of the EB2-I figures in the current (or recent) inventory(s)?

I conclude the figures are extremely likely incorrect, but don't know what they should be with any certainty.

I think I'm just stating what most people believe.

---

Why cannot we hold USCIS accountable to these figures ? How can they publish wrong figures every quarter and get away with it ?
Isn't there a Freedom of Information Act that one could use to obtain correct numbers or contact ombudsman ? Isn't it unbelievable that the whole army of AILA attorneys that deal with immigration cases choose to remain silent over such gross fudging of numbers ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spectator

If 2008 truly still had >7k applications pending at the end of December 2017, then it doesn't seem possible for EB2-I to have a FAD of late 2008.

If you adjust the 2009 and 2010 figures up to the previous level, then 2008 has around 1.6k applications pending.

There were about 1k reductions in the EB2-I inventory in Q1 FY2018.

---

Exactly, those are my thoughts too. If FAD of Dec 2008 is correct then the inventory data is incorrect. Hope Oct 2018 inventory data answers our questions and also has correct data (hope they don't mess up 2009 inventory).

Again if 2008 inventory data is incorrect and there is any SO it will be first step towards dates movement.

Hope less number of perm applications is an indication for SO.

Spec/QESEHMK/IMDENG/HOPE21,
I am in agreement USCIS is wholely controlling the AOS process by not letting use the filing dates, to cut off the H1b's from AC21 benefits. AILA, murthy and other major law firms are aware of this and keeping MUM.

Can we not use Mandamus/Writ to USCIS demanding supply and demand numbers used in visa allocation over the years?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Hi Spec

Thank you for a painstaking response.

The reality of backlogged people is that prior to the concept of "Filing Dates" the AOS candidates could file 485 ASAP and obtain AC21 benefits much sooner. Now they are robbed of that.

I respectfully disagree that VB is partially controlled by USCIS. USCIS did announce that they will not honor the Filing Dates. But they could only announce it when the mechanism appeared on the horizon. Earlier they had no basis to say such a thing.

If my memory is right, this change started under OBAMA administration. So while Trump admin is clearly anti-immigrant, I think when it comes to EB immigrants - there really isn't much difference because EB applicants do not wield political influence but their employers do. So it is much easier to maintain status quo or worsen it.

And that's exactly what we are seeing.

---

Was it not introduced in the first place to give more clarity and visibility on the number of applications and also allow back logged countries to file in advance and have the security of EAD and AC-21s.

Hi all, I am about to send my EAD/AP renewal and I noticed that EAD I-765 USCIS form expired on 2/28/2018. I have waited for a week, but it's not yet updated. I am wondering if I sent this form, my package would get rejected. Anyone having gone thru similar experience, please advise.

Since this is the most watched thread, I placed it here. Please move as required.

It almost sounds like forget about the new bills/law and be happy if we get the legitimate numbers that we suppose to get under the current law.

I called Congressman Kevin Yoder's office yesterday to get an update on H.R 392 on where it stands and the urgency of folks stuck in EB india catgeory. The secretary mentioned the plan is to include this bill in the large appropriations bill which is scheduled for vote this month end.

I request you all to call his office at (913) 621-0832 to raise this issue again. Please be courteous and professional as they very much understand the dire situation we are in. Thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by srimurthy

Was it not introduced in the first place to give more clarity and visibility on the number of applications and also allow back logged countries to file in advance and have the security of EAD and AC-21s.

---

I think that was the stated reason. But I think Spec said it very wisely (see below). I do not know if those are his words or the words of USCIS.

Quote:

---

Moving those (Final Action Dates) forward large amounts has consequences - consequences the concept of Filing Dates was supposed to make sure didn't happen.

---

In other words USCIS' intention is to minimize AC21 benefits. If there are large movements then people will enjoy AC21 benefits much longer. Spec thinks USCIS has a strong anti-immigrant element while DoS being a global department is much more liberal. I think generally that's true. The only place where I tend to disagree (and perhaps its my own lack of intimate knowledge of how these departments work) is that I find it hard to believe that they have policy differences at departmental level. Seeing how under Trump DoS is suffering, i have started to think I may be wrong.

Hi Spec and other Gurus:

I have a question for you. My H-1B extension was approved recently, but I noticed a problem on my approval form. The expiry date on my newly attached I-94 is earlier than the expiry date mentioned on the form I-797A. The one on the I-797A is correct. So, the question is why these two dates are different? Is it a mistake? It has nothing to do with my passport expiry date either. Should I even bother about this discrepancy since my I-485 application is pending and I also have an EAD/AP? Please advise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by itsmusa

Hi all, I am about to send my EAD/AP renewal and I noticed that EAD I-765 USCIS form expired on 2/28/2018. I have waited for a week, but it's not yet updated. I am wondering if I sent this form, my package would get rejected. Anyone having gone thru similar experience, please advise.

Since this is the most watched thread, I placed it here. Please move as required.

---

Hi all - Please advise.

I am all set re: I-765 EAD.

I called USCIS 1-800-375-5283
option 1 - English
option 1 - request a form
option 2 - speak to rep

USCIS rep confirmed that I-765 EAD, though shows expired 02/28/2018, USCIS goes by the edition date - that is in the footer - 7/17/17 and that's the most up-to-date edition as of now. So, recommended me to send that form I-765 EAD.

Also, on USCIS website, on I-765 EAD page, under form edition section, it's clarified - 07/17/17. A new edition of this form is coming soon. In the meantime, you may file using the 07/17/17 edition. You can find the edition date at the bottom of the page on the form and instructions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by itsmusa

I am all set re: I-765 EAD.

I called USCIS 1-800-375-5283
option 1 - English
option 1 - request a form
option 2 - speak to rep

USCIS rep confirmed that I-765 EAD, though shows expired 02/28/2018, USCIS goes by the edition date - that is in the footer - 7/17/17 and that's the most up-to-date edition as of now. So, recommended me to send that form I-765 EAD.

Also, on USCIS website, on I-765 EAD page, under form edition section, it's clarified - 07/17/17. A new edition of this form is coming soon. In the meantime, you may file using the 07/17/17 edition. You can find the edition date at the bottom of the page on the form and instructions.

---

Cool... Thanks for the info.

Hi guys, I have a question. As we know, that EB3 row PI is very low, so there will definitely be a huge spillover this year. I know there is no law/rule that all the spillover will be diverted to EB1 but based on the past patterns they eventually benefit the most from that spillover. EB2-1 got no spillover this year (declining SO every year) and is the most backlogged category currently.

Since there is no visibility of dates after Aug 2007 for EB3-I, shouldn’t EB2-I folks start downgrading this year into EB3-I instead of waiting for EB3 to get past EB2l. I say that because I don’t want EB2 or EB3 to lose this year’s SO to EB1. That is there is no vertical spillover, from EB3 to EB1 or EB2. If we keep on waiting then based on historical data EB1 will use the entire SO again this year, as is also seen in P1 reduction of Jan 2018. But if both EB2 and EB3 have enough numbers then SO stays horizontal.

From all I have heard if you are in both EB2 and EB3, you can use any I-140, unless that’s not true. Is there a way to keep SO in EB2 and EB3 because by the time EB2 downgrades will happen, EB1C would’ve already used the SO again for this year from EB3? I just hope it could be on the money (at the right moment) and not lose another year. I would be happy if EB2 or EB3 uses that SO but not EB1. The only way to keep it horizontal is to have enough numbers in both EB2 and EB3 otherwise it goes to EB1 again. EB2 already has enough numbers but not EB3. I asked this question because EB3 P1 is very low this year (around 17K). Again I might be wrong about this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vedu

Hi Spec and other Gurus:

I have a question for you. My H-1B extension was approved recently, but I noticed a problem on my approval form. The expiry date on my newly attached I-94 is earlier than the expiry date mentioned on the form I-797A. The one on the I-797A is correct. So, the question is why these two dates are different? Is it a mistake? It has nothing to do with my passport expiry date either. Should I even bother about this discrepancy since my I-485 application is pending and I also have an EAD/AP? Please advise.

---

My suggestion is to get it fixed. In general, if you are on H1B status, it is better to continue to be on it rather on switch to EAD/AP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tenyearsgone

My suggestion is to get it fixed. In general, if you are on H1B status, it is better to continue to be on it rather on switch to EAD/AP.

---

TYG, thanks for your suggestion. Technically, I am on H1-B now since it has been renewed recently. My new I-94 will expire in early 2020 and I-797A will expire in late 2020. So, the question would be what happens when I-94 expires? Do I have to go out of the country and get the visa stamp/new I-94? Or can I ignore the I-94 because of pending I-485 status and continue to work on the H1B status beyond the I-94 expiry date without leaving the country?

I guess I am just hesitant to unnecessarily reopen the case to fix a small error in these uncertain times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vedu

TYG, thanks for your suggestion. Technically, I am on H1-B now since it has been renewed recently. My new I-94 will expire in early 2020 and I-797A will expire in late 2020. Or can I ignore the I-94 because of pending I-485 status and continue to work on the H1B status beyond the I-94 expiry date without leaving the country?

---

It's hard to say. 2020 is a couple of years away... maybe you'll get your GC by then if you are lucky and this will all be moot. If your I-94 expires and you start working on EAD then any H1B extension that you apply for in late 2020 will come without a I-94. My understanding is that if your I-94 expires, you would have to switch to EAD unless you have applied for a H1B extension prior to such expiry.

Quote:

---

So, the question would be what happens when I-94 expires? Do I have to go out of the country and get the visa stamp/new I-94?

---

I guess this would be one way to get the I94 fixed before expiry also.

Quote:

---

I guess I am just hesitant to unnecessarily reopen the case to fix a small error in these uncertain times.

---

Totally hear you :(.

Hi Folks - My PD is 29-Jan-2009. Any idea when my dates will become current?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tenyearsgone

... maybe you'll get your GC by then if you are lucky and this will all be moot.

---

Hope this comes true for all of us. We are so close, yet so far away:(.

Who the hell knows in today's climate - but I would say that by the end of current FY (i.e by Sept) is strong possibility. I am assuming EB2I.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eagles_28

Hi Folks - My PD is 29-Jan-2009. Any idea when my dates will become current?

---

https://travel.state.gov/content/tra...pril-2018.html

EB2-I -- 22DEC08
EB3-I -- 01FEB08

EB1 China and India retrogress to 01JAN12 (effectively Unavailable)