Could this be a reality in 1year from now?
EB2-I May 2010
EB3-I Dec 2010
Assumption: Less porting from EB3 to EB2, No change in spill over rules, no immigration bills and added contentious immigration issues we see today
Printable View
Could this be a reality in 1year from now?
EB2-I May 2010
EB3-I Dec 2010
Assumption: Less porting from EB3 to EB2, No change in spill over rules, no immigration bills and added contentious immigration issues we see today
< >
I think CO is moving EB3I randomly, without knowing the exact numbers of EB3I Perms outstanding. He might as well push it to be equal with EB2I at one go and get done with it!
Hi - i have a question re downgrade. my priority Date is EB2 - 1 Dec 2010.
In order to downgrade ( with same Employer ), do i have to refile perm or just refile 140/485 with supp j when PD becomes current for EB3 ?
i read an article re what EB2 C folks did back in 2013/4 and cant find that link anymore but that made me believe that there was a path to downgrade without having to redo perm. pls comment. thanks
ps i am trying to understand this so as to ask appropriate questions to fragomen.
That will probably be the case in the next VB! Then, in the next FY, EB3I zooms ahead.
I also completely agree that YT's chart would have come true if not for CO's ineptitude. Too many visas were taken away from EB3 and given to other categories. I held on to YT's chart for a long time and did not upgrade. But seeing all the misallocations, I finally did and my PD is current from July VB. But looks like my PD may be current in September VB too in EB3I.
Either way, EB3Is deserved this at least 2 years ago.
Wonder what impact the strict enforcement of immigration rules is having on PERM approvals and overall SO. Heard stories of RFEs for people who are working for Desi consultants and WITCH companies. That with 485 interview should presumably lower the visa demand. Although I am also seeing cases where people are going back to India after H1B denial and applying in EB1 through CP from India. I guess that's why CP cases are much higher too.
Iatiam
Yes. They already moved the dates more than necessary. I do not think there is enough SO to clear everyone before Mar 15, 2009. Not sure why CO could not have started advancing dates earlier and advanced one month at a time.
If you notice the pattern of approvals this month then you would find that most of the approvals are coming in for the people in Feb and Mar 2009. This might lead to a situation where many in Dec 2008 and Jan 2009 do not get approved and will provide reason for CO to retrogress dates for EB2I to Nov 2008.
Hopefully, I am proven wrong and there are enough visas to cover everyone before Mar 15, 2009, but right now it does not seem so.
Did you see the trackitt approvals? we still have this FY quota left, only 127 approvals compared to last years 174.
http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showth...2014-vs-FY2013
Open question, if the dates were suppose to retro, on what basis EB2-I dates were held at March 15,2009 for rest of FY?
1. Is it because CO is expecting to apply SO from EB3 to EB2-India?
2. Is it because CO is expecting to use next years country quota to approve EB2-I applications until March 15,2009?
3. If #1 is not the case, With pretty much every category went to retro, where are the SO applied? if any?
The tables have nothing to do with I-485 applications or whether they are pending.
The tables represent the raw data for PERM Certifications. The title for each of the posts clearly states the data relates to PERM.
The columns (FY) are the FY in which the PERM was Certified by OFLC.
The rows are the derived PD from the A-number. Although this is imperfect for individual cases, over 100s of thousands of cases the errors should get smoothed out.
The tables make no assumptions about conversion to I-485 (or even I-140 for that matter). They make no assumptions on whether there are people with more than one PERM, abandonment, whether any subsequent petition or application has since been approved etc.
As stated above, they represent the raw data, which people can, if they wish, use as a starting point for further calculations, or derive trends.
If you compare the trackitt approvals from last year , which was a total of 174, hen you should anticipate 43 approvals per quarter. In the first three quarters that would translate to 129 approvals and that is what we see. So we do have last quarter worth of annual quota left. This would translate to roughly 700 real world approvals.
the last quarter is July - Sep and the EB2I dates were moved to Mar 15, 2009 in the last quarter. So the additional demand generated will be at least 2583 (Jan 2009 - 1154 / Feb 2009 - 888 / Considering half of Mar 2009 - 541).
As you can see the remaining quota of 700 cannot suffice fore 2583 demand.
There will be some SO available and assuming that the SO is at least 3000 we would barely be able to cover the dates until Mar 15 2009.
This would be true if the latest Pending Inventory is correct. If you consider August 2017 PI then the numbers would be 675+645+340 = 1660, so even if there are 1K SO it will suffice till March 15th 2009.
I personally feel that latest PI is wrong coz in 2008 alone there are 6,658 and if this num was correct dates would have been in 2008 and not 2009.
You are correct that the pending inventory may not be correct. However, I am thinking from a conservative standpoint and hence I consider the worst pending inventory. You also need to account for the fact that some porting might be ongoing and also that some of the candidates might have married and have 2 applications leading to some increase in the pending inventory.
I do not think we would see retrogression in Sep VB. September VB is the last VB of the month and if CO feels that there are not enough visas then they can always internally retrogress the dates anytime in September. I think the eb2I dates will stay at Mar 15, 2009 for the rest of the year.
A 3ROW friend of mine got his Interview appointment in less than 6 months after filing AOS. So, all those who have been saying that it is taking 1 yr to schedule interviews are just BS'ng. But bottomline is that 3I folks with PD>July 2007 have no chance of getting approved in this FY. There will definitely be SO in EB3 this year and that should flow to EB1 NOT EB2 as is being fervently hoped and promoted by vested interests. But given the approvals in 2I, it looks like CO is wilfully diverting EB3 SO to 2I!!
There is no law that requires or allows EB3 SO to be applied to EB1. On the other hand porting from EB3 to EB2 has happened in droves and downgrading from EB2 to EB3 is freely allowed. So, maintaining a strict allocation between EB2 and EB3 makes no sense because they anyhow use up each other's visa numbers. So applying EB3 so to EB2 is perfectly rational and justifiable. I have never understood people who actively canvas against their own self interest.
Yesterday USCIS released the new Metric's for Q2 2018.
Nothing new that we don't know. 28336 approved 485 and 15194 approved at Service centers,13142 at field office centers.
H1B rejections on other hand went up by 45% when compared with Q2 2017.
https://www.uscis.gov/tools/reports-...ustment-status
Despite of extended delays in processing with mandated interviews, USCIS performance seems to be good. USCIS approved 30472 applications in 1st quarter and 28336 in second quarter.
If 20 percent(28000) of available 140000 are approved in consular processing at overseas consulates this year, only 53192 GCs left to be issued in 3rd and 4th quarter which is about 26596 a quarter. So i guess no GC will be wasted because of interview delays.
bluelabel,
Just to add to your post.
We also know that 16,239 EB Consular processing cases were approved in Q1/Q2.
This brings EB visa use for the first half of the FY to 75,047. This represents 53.6% of the 140,000 total allocation - pretty close to the maximum 54% allowed by law.
There's been another 4,300 Consular approvals in April/May (when EB1-IC was retrogressed), which suggests about 12,900 Consular approvals for the second half of the FY.
That would leave about 52k AOS applications for USCIS to approve (or 26k per quarter).
As you say, this seems well within USCIS ability, even with the new interview mandate and even if the actual number is a bit higher than that.
This is a worrying trend and shows what is happening in WITCH companies. People whose H1B is denied are going back to India and doing CP in EB1C category. DHS in an effort to curb down fraud came up with the idea of interviews but now we have a double-headed hydra instead of one.
Iatiam
Spec,
I would like to review what i said again. Out of 30472 I-485s approved in first quarter 25396 are approved at service centers and only 5076 are approved at field offices, in second quarter out of 28336 only 15194 are approved at service centers and 13142 approved at field offices.
Looks like there were several 485s approved that were filed before March 6th 2017 in first half of the FY and only 18218 are approved at field offices after interview. The percentage of applications approved after interview in first half is ~31 and 69 percent of them approved without interview.
Perhaps i may be little overestimating USCIS ability to conduct 100000 plus EB 485 interviews in future. I guess there will be delays in conducting interviews in next FY as well and may have to move EB2I little aggressively at some point of time.
Field offices do pretty big no of interviews every year when you consider family based, citizenship etc. i have read somewhere and I cant recall the source now that fueld offices were told few months back to prioritize EB based interviews over others. So they very well can do 100K interviews if they want to.
bluelabel,
I share your concern for the future.
It's what happens when nativists like Miller are allowed to dictate policy.
No thought (or maybe it was) was given to the consequences of the decision.
Each Field Office has a maximum bandwidth for the number of interviews that can be carried out.
I don't think hiring more people is really an option - they have to sit somewhere and I don't think the present facilities can't accommodate the increase.
So far, it seems that space for EB interviews has been made at the expense of other immigration benefits that also require an interview. Naturalization processing times have increased by up to 4 times the period they were before the change.
Perhaps it's going to return to how AOS used to be, with 3 to 4 year processing times. If that happens, more people will choose Consular Processing, which will have shorter more predictable processing times.
Or, we could have a regime change .... I don't expect it to get better under the current administration. If they can't pass laws, they seem determined to strangle immigration via policy memos.
Just as an addendum to show the progression through the FY.
Based on Trackitt figures, the % of cases approved After and Before (including March 7, 2017) in the first 3 quarters were:
EB2-ROW
----- After -- Before
Q1 -- 24.3% --- 75.7%
Q2 -- 43.4% --- 56.6%
Q3 -- 79.8% --- 20.2%
EB3-ROW
----- After -- Before
Q1 -- 36.8% --- 63.2%
Q2 -- 69.2% --- 30.8%
Q3 -- 87.3% --- 12.7%
Spec, agree with you on this. The whole purpose of adding AOS interviews is to slow down legal immigration. If people get their GCs delayed, their naturalization and hence, ultimately becoming a citizen is also delayed...which by the way is delayed too because of the interviews. There was a reason why AOS interviews were waived before.
These nativists are scared that whites will soon be a minority in this country. Immigration is this country is dominated by non-white people now. Some in Congress like Cotton and Grassley are desperately trying to cut down the annual GC quota. But since Congress is incompetent and cannot pass a single bill, the administration is doing its best to slow down immigration by policy memos. They keep adding hurdles (2 memos came out last week...no more RFEs, straight denials and NTAs if you fall out of status...so if you leave..you will be barred for 5 years) and others like rescinding H4 EAD.
Trump has been unable to build his wall against illegal immigration but he is already doing it against legal immigration.Yet, somehow our crowds still do rallies supporting this administration and it's policies.
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-bl...gal-immigrants
But look at the immigration laws passed even by Congress over the years....they have been a series of xenophobic and racist actions attempted to stop people of certain regions from immigrating here. US has a long history of being hostile to a new group of immigrants. But this administration has literally declared war on immigrants.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPn9qZULv7A
Before the new AOS interview policy, USCIS mainly had to do AOS interviews for categories that did not have an annual cap, such as immediate relatives, asylum, or refugees.
The only cases where AOS interviews required requesting a visa number were FB. The vast majority of FB cases are actual done by CP. In 2016 only 15,116 FB cases out of 238,087 (6.3%) were done by AOS.
I could not find any document showing the the total interview volume for USCIS but we can make some estimates. I will use 2016 since there were very little EB based interviews during that fiscal year.
Family based I-485 (includes FB and IR categories):338k
Citizenship: 972k
Refugee/Asylum (included Cuban Adjustment Act) AOS: 150k
Removal of Conditions: 145k
Total: 1,605,000
So, under the current trend of about 85% of EB cases being done through AOS, this would represent 119,000 cases or an extra 7.4% I will let others conclude whether they think this is something can be accommodated.
Looks like USCIS lost my spouse's RFE reply.
Received RFE(Myself and Spouse) on May 22nd and attorney replied in separately packages, primary was received by USCIS few days earlier than spouse RFE(USPS messed it up here).
Myself: Medicals, Sup-J (approved on 06/27), Status
Spouse: Medicals.
On July 16th they have again sent RFE for spouse and today we received it.
Resubmission of evidence.
"USCIS issued a request for evidence on May 22,2018, for which USCIS received a response on June 11, 2018. This evidence is not contained in the record. Please resubmit."
Do we need to again redo the medicals or can we submit the one which we took on May 22nd, not sure how much we need to pay to doctor again(even for copies).