Specs,
do you think there will be SOs for EB2-I this year?
Printable View
Specs,
do you think there will be SOs for EB2-I this year?
Yes, I also think EB3 dates will move to Dec 2008 (around EB2 date) since most of the folks in EB3 in 2008 PD already upgraded and demand might be less. EB3 movement to Dec 2008Quote:
Originally Posted by HarepathekaIntezar
In 2017, EB3I got 6600 visas and could have got another 2200 if they were allocated correctly.
EB3I Inventory per Oct 2017 is 6,250 + 1000 (Sep-Dec 2007 estimate 250/month) which roughly reflects the 6600 visa allocated in FY2017. I think April VB dates movement is based on previous FY allocation (maybe 2200 misallocation number is also considered).
With fewer PERM applications this year leading to less EB3 Row demand or less demand in EB3I between Sep 2007 to Dec 2008, I hope we will have further dates movement.
I am expecting further significant dates movement in June/July bulletin.
If the significant dates movement is to utilize 2018 numbers, then that has to happen in May VB. If it happens in June/July VB, there won't be enough time for USCIS to process those applications before Sept 30, 2018.Quote:
Originally Posted by GCdreamz
NO. But what could happen is something similar to Chinese Dates - EB3 being ahead of EB2. If anyone has already filed for AOS, then they could take a flier on Interfile and downgrade.Quote:
Originally Posted by EB2-03252009
The figures you have quoted from permchecker.com are for ALL countries. For INDIA only, the following are the numbers. Don't know which is relevant here(total or certified). I think it should be certified. These are EB2+EB3Quote:
Originally Posted by iatiam
total; certified
2008: 15768; 7197
2009: 16968; 6403
2010: 37673 ; 14872
If you are going to use PERM certifications as a starting point to gauge demand, then FY (or CY) certifications by OFLC are not that useful IMO. They contain certifications from several PD calendar years.
Certifications for a PD CY occur over several FY of certifications.
For India, based on PD derived from A-number, the certified figures are:
India --- Certified
CY2007 --- 23,098
CY2008 --- 23,746
CY2009 --- 16,672
CY2010 --- 22,361
CY2011 --- 30,024
CY2012 --- 37,260
CY2013 --- 36,159
CY2014 --- 41,336
CY2015 --- 45,535
CY2016 --- 49,028
For CY2010, January to July are relatively light, while August to December have much higher figures.
What is your take on likely demand build up with April VB for EB3I? I estimated it at only 1800 and I suspect that quite a few of them won't be processed within this FY. Even if CO moves the Dates to 31st Dec 2008 in May VB, I don't think the total demand generation will exceed 5K (assuming that USCIS will be able to process some of these applications) and that seems to be the only way of utilizing the numbers in this FY.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
what is flier on Interfile and downgrade? sorry i got no info on this, can you explain in detail?Quote:
Originally Posted by HarepathekaIntezar
All I can say is that EB3-I Inventory for 2007 has reduced by 60-65% since December 2009.Quote:
Originally Posted by nsingh
The figures USCIS published in 2010 were a good match to the IVAMS report that DOS made available at that time.
It's very difficult to say what the figures might be for years later than that. Over time, less people have filed in EB3 in the first place.
So today there is a valuable lesson learnt.. for me at-least. People who stick to their employers for 10+ years in EB2-I have to do nothing, As soon as EB3-I gets current, you just have do a concurrent file of I-140 and I-485 in EB3-I. Then if dates go back in EB3-I and somehow EB2-I gets current...you can file another I-485 in EB2-I . It's not that "Drowning man will clutch at a straw" kind of situation, but it's the only legal option if you want to get EAD and AP legally after 10 years.
As always thank you guys..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Spec.. this is news for me. I always thought that if you port EB3 -> EB2 or EB2 -> EB3, you need to start over and do PERM, I140 and I1485. So If I understand correctly what you said above, PERM is not needed.
In my specific case, I have EB2 PERM with PD Dec 2010. So if my PD is current in EB3, i can just file I140 and I485 concurrently and get EAD and AP under EB3? Is this correct?
If yes, can I apply for EB2 I485 in case EB2 gets current in future?
Basically get a Green card in which ever category offers me one?
Thanks for your inputs:
PERM is valid for 6 months after approval. It isnt valid forever. I doubt ppl who have 140 approved in EB2 with a expired PERM can simply port down.Quote:
Originally Posted by skpanda
One will need a new PERM. I am pretty certain a new PERM is needed.
I don't think new PERM is required, at least that's what this source is suggesting,Quote:
Originally Posted by knighthood83
http://www.visatopia.com/services/pe...ked-questions/
It says
"11. Can an EB-2 be downgraded to an EB-3 without filing for a new PERM?
Yes. In general, the petitioner needs to file the I-140 petition with an original approved labor certification for EB-2 and EB-3 petitions, and it must be filed within the 180-day validity period of the labor certification. However, the 2007 Neufeld Memo made exceptions for filing the subsequent/amended I-140 petition in instances where the amended petition is requesting a different visa classification than the visa classification requested in the previously filed petition (or when the previously filed Form I-140 petition has been determined to have been lost by USCIS/Department of Labor). USCIS will continue to accept amended or duplicate Form I-140 petitions that are filed with a copy of a labor certification that is expired at the time the amended or duplicate Form I-140 petition is filed, as long as the original approved labor certification was filed in support of a previously filed petition during the labor certification’s validity period."
Iatiam
Does anyone know how long it takes to schedule a 485 interview at a USCIS field office? Looking at the latest 485 inventory, the EB3 total inventory is about 17,000 for an annual quota of 40,000. So if the visa wastage is to be avoided, they have to receive and adjucate at least 23,000 cases in six months. Six months is 182 calender days and 127 business days which translates to total of 181 petitions to be interviewed total in all field offices per day? How realistic is this? Does it mean that EB3 is going to lose the visas to EB1 and EB2, again?
I am not even considering the fact that the six-month-beyond-August-2007 date in April 2018 VB might be too little, too late. If I were an EB3 applicant within six months to an year of Aug 2007, I would have long ported, rather than wait a decade or more to file for 485. I personally know at least five people who changed jobs just so that they can port (PD in 2008) and they are all GC holders now.
Add to it the narrative that was told for the last ten years - if you are in EB3, you are doomed. I have not seen many people who willingly went for EB3 after the Aug 2007 visa fiasco.
Waiting on everyone's thoughts.
Iatiam
Bro, the Inventory is as of January 2018. We don't even know if it is end of Jan or beginning of Jan. How does that make it 6 months? It will be 8 or 9 months depending on the exact date of the Inventory. Another thing is the Interview is not mandatory for pending Inventory. It is only applicable to fresh applications after the new ruling came into force.Quote:
Originally Posted by iatiam
His whole point was whether EB3 will lose the numbers this year also because of too little too late. Anyone after PD July 2007 who are new to the I485 will have to go for interview. Looks like EB3 will lose some numbers this year. I hope they move the dates generously to mid/late 2009 or something so that people still on EB3I can get their EADs fast. Also, after 180 days of I485 pending, AC21 will kick in.Quote:
Originally Posted by HarepathekaIntezar
Hi Spec and other experts,
Since EB3 India is catching up and doing better than EB2 India, Should folks in EB2 India who have a priority date in 2009/10 start preparing applications NOW for downgrade?
how can you file approved I 140 which is for EB2 for EB 3?
I believe you need to have EB3 PERM first to file I 140. Isn't it?
NOW might not be necessary - depends on how the next couple months play out.
Also - would a downgrade mean an in-person interview as it would be a new 485? Cursory googling says no. http://nairlaw.com/blog/posts/12
Quote:
Originally Posted by altek001
Spec;
I have a question regarding :
2) The company used the original PERM certification used for the EB2 I-140 approval to apply for an I-140 under EB3.
Can one file I 140 for EB 3 category if his EB 2 I 140 is approved?
I never heard of this until today. I thought a person need to file PERM in EB 3 and then I 140 in EB 3 to port EB 2 priority date.
Please guide me
There's no such thing as an "EB2" PERM or an "EB3" PERM.Quote:
Originally Posted by texas_
At the I-140 stage, USCIS determines whether the PERM satisfies the minimum requirements for the EB category requested in the I-140 application.
Any PERM that satisfies the minimum EB2 requirements of "an advanced degree or bachelors plus 5 years progressive experience" will automatically satisfy the minimum EB3 requirements of "a bachelors degree or 2 years experience required".
A PERM doesn't expire, as long as it is used to support an I-140 application within 180 days of certification. Once that condition is satisfied, it can be used to support further I-140 applications, unless revoked by USCIS for cause.
It wouldn't require a new I-485 if one is already pending.Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng
When the EB3 PD became current, a written request to interfile the existing I-485 to the new EB3 I-140 would be made. That's also what the article says.
Whether that would trigger an interview is another question.
USCIS actively discourages multiple I-485 applications.
Nice; Thanks for the Information Spec.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Thats great news. I have EB2 PD Dec 2010. So if my PD becomes current in EB3, I can file I140 and I485 concurrently and also EAD/AP? Please confirm. Thanks!
If a PERM satisfies EB2 requirement for job X how can the same satisfiy EB3 requirements for job Y with lower standards? When the requirements are lower for EB3 that means more US citizens or GC holders could have applied for the same. Witjout that I doubt USCIS will accept that PERM for EB-3. I understand USCIS saying that a particular PERM dont meet the high bar for EB-2 and then someone applies for EB-3. However, once a PERM meets EB-2 standards; the same couldn’t be used for EB-3 as that would exclude a large pool from applying initially unless the language in PERM such that it satisfies both EB-3 and EB-2. For example - candidate should be a Masters in IT along with 1 year experience or a graduate with 3 years experience.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
What you said "theoretically" makes sense. But given the fact that thousands of people have downgraded proves that it doesn't matter. It's probably the same logic with with QA leads and Java programmers claim GCs under EB1C category.Quote:
Originally Posted by delguy
Iatiam
That is exactly the situation, when the existing PERM (previously used to support an EB2 I-140) is used for an EB3 I-140.Quote:
Originally Posted by delguy
The minimum requirements for the job haven't changed and whether there were other applicants who could apply was tested before, when the PERM was originally submitted. It's excluding no one.
Just because an I-140 is applied for under EB3 doesn't mean that only the minimum requirements for EB3 are required to do the job.
All that is required is that they are equal to, or higher than the minimum requirements for EB3. There's no limit on how high the requirements are, as long as they are required for the position.
There's no requirement to file under EB2, even if the education/experience required supports it.
So effectively all perms are valid forever when an i-140 has been filedQuote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Important AAO Dec Affecting EB-1C Applicants in U.S.
Matter of S-P-, Inc., Adopted Decision 2018-01 (AAO Mar. 19, 2018) clarifies that a beneficiary who worked abroad for a qualifying multinational organization for at least one year, but left its employ for a period of more than two years after being admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant, does not satisfy the one-in-three foreign employment requirement for EB-1C immigrant classification as a multinational manager or executive. On the same day of March 19, 2018, the USCIS issued a Policy Memorandum adopting this decision as "precedent" binding decision for any future cases. Read on.
For the last few years, the number of immigrants using this EB-1C classification has steadily increased, affecting EB-1 immigrant visa numbers backlog for Indians and Chinese. This precedent and binding decision will somehow affect some of them who stay here for two years after their leaving from their employers in their home countries.
http://www.immigration-law.com/
The full decision is here: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/...ter-of-S-P.pdfQuote:
Originally Posted by EB2-03252009
Let's be clear about what happened.
The person had the required experience as a manager with Foreign Company F when they first came to the USA and joined Affiliate A. Had they remained employed by Affiliate A, the passage of time would not have had any effect on their eligibility for EB1C.
In this case, the person left Affiliate A and went to work for an entirely unrelated Company Z for 4 years.
They then rejoined Affiliate A. At the time they rejoined Affiliate A, more than the 3 years in which they needed to have worked at least 1 year for the the Foreign Company F had passed, so they failed too meet this requirement.
Affiliate A tried to claim that only the situation at the first entry to the USA should be considered.
Terrible explanation - it's much easier to just read the USCIS Memo.
Thanks for the explanation, Spec. How will this affect EB1C filings? Oh law firm makes it sound like it would have an impact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Iatiam
Thanks Spec. That's clear for me. What is not clear to me is where was the room for ambiguation in the first place. It was always clear to me that the 1 in 3 condition always speaks to the 3 years preceding the filing of GC under EB1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
I believe this is going to significantly reduce India EB1 filings. The reason being there are many Indian EB2 who hopped from one company to next using their old priority dates and then shopped for an EB1 using their past experience with an India centric outsourcing firm. I think USCIS simply failed to follow their own rules and allowed this mess. But it is only fair that they corrected it. EB2-India will benefit ... but most likely next year onwards because EB1 backlog will need to be cleared off such applicants as well as people who were stuck in EB1 due to such backlog.
Q,Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
Possibly you know better than me, but I tended to think that most Indian EB1-C were from the WITCH type companies and that most of those came direct to the company and never left for another Company before an EB1C was applied for.
Under those circumstances, the EB1-C petition could be applied for after any number of years and would not limited to just the 2 years after they joined the Company in the USA.
If my feeling is correct, I don't think the precedent decision is going to significantly lower the number of EB1-C approvals.Quote:
In promulgating the implementing regulations, the former Immigration and Naturalization Service concluded that it was not the intent of Congress to disqualify “nonimmigrant managers or executives who have already been transferred to the United States” to work within the same corporate organization. See 56 Fed. Reg. 30,703, 30,705 (July 5, 1991).
Thus, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(j)(3)(i)(B) allows USCIS to look beyond the three-year period immediately preceding the filing of the I-140 petition, when the beneficiary is already working for a qualifying U.S. entity.
Without such a provision, a beneficiary employed in the United States by a qualifying organization in a nonimmigrant status for more than two years would not be eligible for immigrant classification as a multinational manager or executive.
You're correct that people won't be able to hop Companies after coming to the USA to join an MNC and think they can then return to the MNC for an EB1-C petition at a much later date.
I think you're in a much better position to judge how much that happens, but if they had management experience with the MNC abroad before joining the US operation, that seems a disincentive to switch jobs.
Thanks Spec for explaining what created the ambiguity (i.e. USCIS themselves allowing 1 in 3 to not be applied when the candidate has been more than 2 years in US).
To answer why I think that is wrong - I will pick on your last sentence.
This is not true IMHO in most cases. My judgement (no empirical evidence ...but a pretty good understanding of how things work) is that majority of EB1Cs came to US generally at the lowest level and rose through the ranks. So they are quite qualified for be managers. That I do not doubt. But then this scenario is no different than an EB2 who is employed with an American company and is a director or a VP. The fact that s/he never served in India excludes them from benefitting from EB1C and is unfair.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
The original USCIS condition was perfect - where the company is forced to send an employee to US as a management person.
Many times they are sending their average workers who later on become management or sometimes not. Team leader, project manager or even a manager is not really management. Management should be defined VP and above or perhaps director and above. Today USCIS is allowing this injustice to happen and they are not following their own rule to either letter or intent.
As you know I am an extremely pro immigrant person. But whether you look at it from "Justice / Fairness" angle or simply from "Good economic sense" perspective - the current decision is a very welcome step and they should broaden it to ALL applicants and start the 3 year clock to preceding 3 years for EVERYBODY including foreign nationals employed by American companies regardless whether they served abroad or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
http://canteyhanger.com/news/immigration-news/
EB-2 India. Unlike the lack of visibility into EB-2 China demand, Charlie has significant visibility in his pending demand file for India. Members should therefore expect intermittent holding of the final action date coupled with continued gradual movement without volatility. Charlie is unable to advance EB-2 India more aggressively due to concerns about EB-3 to EB-2 upgrades. If there are otherwise unused EB-2 Worldwide numbers later this fiscal year, it may allow EB-2 India to advance further. The EB-2 India final action date advances one week in April to December 22, 2008. Charlie remains hopeful that the final action date in this category will get to early 2009 before the end of this fiscal year.
Two big questions...
1. Are there still upgrades from EB3 to EB2?
2. Will there be unused EB2-ROW later this yr?
If this is only an interpretation correction by USCIS ("the USCIS issued a Policy Memorandum adopting this decision as "precedent" binding decision for any future cases."), then how come it will apply only to cases going forward and not to all the ones that are already in Q, or the ones that are already approved.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
There are many instances where an employer applies for L1A or EB1C for L1B / H1B non-immigrant employee. Many of them do not have management responsibilities in the first two years. If at the time of the original L1B/H1B visa application, the employee responsibilities did not include management responsibilities (even if the the employer claims that the employee was a manager abroad), I wonder if this ruling can be extended to deny those EB1-C cases. If this happens, it can impact a larger population of EB1-C applicants.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Q,Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
If the "majority of EB1Cs came to US generally at the lowest level and rose through the ranks", then they would not qualify for EB1-C.
It's a requirement for EB1-C that they worked in a Managerial or Executive position abroad for the 1 year in 3.
It's not enough to have simply worked in any position abroad, before becoming a Manager in the USA.
I think that standard is fuzzy and malleable. USCIS today is probably taking these companies at their word. I am pretty sure that the reality is closure to what I described.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Lets be honest. Most EB1Cs are from WITCH companies and they have a couple reports (possibly new college grads). We all know they are not deserving the special treatment and the added scrutiny is always welcome.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
I still fail to understand why they have no prevailing wage check for EB1C. The day the prevailing wage is established (lets just say its same as a director in USA - take 200k total) , there will not even be 4k Indian EB1C managers.