manubhai,Quote:
Originally Posted by manubhai
Loved your dry reply!
Sorry I was not able to have given you a more agreeable answer.
Printable View
manubhai,Quote:
Originally Posted by manubhai
Loved your dry reply!
Sorry I was not able to have given you a more agreeable answer.
Thanks for the post. And thanks for your perm breakdown which saves hours of work and effort that I was expecting to spend :).Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
From the perm breakdown data that you posted:
Jan 2007 to Dec 2007 (perm approved after Aug 17): 15,360
Jan 2008 to Dec 2008: 27,715
Jan 2009 to June 2009: 10,416
Jan 2009 to Dec 2009: 18,789
Total from Jan 2007 to Dec 2008: 43,075
Total from Jan 2007 to June 2009: 53,491
Total from Jan2007 to Dec 2009: 61,864
With a OR of 0.8 as the perm to 485:
Till Dec 2008: 0.8 * 43075 = 34,460
Till June 2009: 0.8 * 53491 = 42,792
Till Dec 2009: 0.8 * 61864 = 49491
So with these numbers, shouldn't 40k reach somewhere in April 2009 and 50k will be around Dec 2009? You had mentioned 40k is till nov 2008 and 50k till 15-jun-09. Am I missing something?
I think you are missing porting from EB3 to EB2 for one thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by nathang
but porting is already reflected via the perms, no?
Most of the calculations that I have seen from this thread bring in porting as an independent quantity.Quote:
Originally Posted by vishnu
I think you could add a porting component to OR and calculate it via PERMs but if they recapture priority dates, it gets tricky to account for it.
nathang,Quote:
Originally Posted by nathang
I think you are not accounting for existing cases, which were reported at about 8k at the end of FY2011.
So a simple calculation would be:
Existing cases --------------------- 8,000 (looks like it is more than this)
New PD2007 cases (15,360 * 0.8) --- 12,288
New PD2008 cases (27,715 * 0.8) --- 22,172
Total to end of PD2008 ------------ 42,460
New Jan-Jun PD2009 cases ----------- 8,333
Total to end of June PD2009 cases - 50,793
New Jul-Dec PD2009 cases ----------- 6,698
Total to end of PD2009 ------------ 57,491
Hope that helps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vishnu
vishnu,Quote:
Originally Posted by BBear123
Yes, it is true that the EB2 for Porting will need a PERM, but it is likely that the PD of the EB2 would be in 2010 or 2011.
Therefore, up to then, a Porting case is extra and no significant reduction is required. Either the original EB3 PERM was pre April 15, 2007, or is not accounted for in the EB2:EB3 split.
It is a good point and I account for it in my model from 2010 onwards, when Porting really started to increase and some of the EB2 PERM were probably obtained for Porting of an earlier EB3 PD.
Earlier, the Transformation Factor was described as :
EB2% * I-140 Approval % * Dependent Ratio
I actually use :
TF = EB2% * I-140 Approval % * Dependent Ratio * (100% - % Porting Cases)
or alternatively to reach the final number of I-485 I could use :
((PERM * EB2%) - Assumed Porting EB2 PERM) * I-140 Approval % * Dependent Ratio * Demand Destruction
It may not be perfect, but I am aware of the issue and trying to allow for it. To date, I don't believe it is a significant factor, as Cut Off Dates have not moved into 2010.
For Oct 11 VB dates were moved 3 months. So we should see higher I485 receipts for that month(PWMBs)... but does not seem to be case..not sure if I am reading graph right.Quote:
Originally Posted by veni001
Kanmani,Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanmani
The October Demand Data showed 8,075 EB2-IC cases still remaining as we started FY2012. The USCIS Inventory showed a figure of 8,225.
The PD2007 PERM figures quoted in the previous post are for cases that could not have been pre-existing, so they are in addition to the 8k pre-existing cases.
I had similar argument with Teddy few months back. For which he gave me detailed logical reply. I will try to locate that post. (While I am convinced with his logic - back of mind I have some hopes alive given the history of agencies involved. :) ). Meantime will wait for Spec's reply.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanmani
As suninphx says, this is a debate that we have already had. I have not seen any evidence that the numbers as presented are not correct, although feel free to hold a different opinion. The fact that approvals for EB were halted before the end of FY2011 lends credence to the fact that the numbers remained.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanmani
I don't quite understand what you are trying to say in this sentence:
The Cut Off Date in the September 2011 VB was 15-APR-07, so PDs between April 15, 2007 to July 14,2007 could only be approved from October 1, 2011 when FY2012 started and the October VB came into effect with a Cut Off Date of 15JUL07.Quote:
Moreover, those PDs between Apr to July were getting approved after Oct 1 2011.
Those numbers are part of the 8k.
To date, judging by Trackitt, well over 8k EB2-IC appear to have been approved and not a single Primary applicant has a PD later than July 31, 2007.
All these days I have seen people discussing number visa's per quarter has limit.(Don't know exact details). So has that limit been exceeded here?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Thanks Spec.
Moreover, those PDs between Apr to July were getting approved after Oct 1 2011
8K is shown in the Demand and inventory prior to its approval and they got approved after oct 2011. What I meant to say is 8K is already done so that we should exclude them from the total .
I remember someone posted a link to an official document which indicated that if the "Demand" is low, per country limits should not be imposed. Considering the fact that the EB2-I/C demand is close to 0, I'd think that they are not imposing the per country limits. Am I mistaken?Quote:
Originally Posted by suninphx
Kanmani,Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanmani
Maybe we are talking at cross purposes (and it wouldn't be the first time)!
If we exclude the 8k then sure we can say that a further x are required to reach a specific Cut Off Date from the date that 8k were used this year.
But the total needed in the entire year from October 1, 2011 to reach that Cut Off Date (SOFAD) would be 8k + x.
That is the figure I am quoting.
If you are saying that those 8k were approved from the FY2011 quota, then we'll have to agree to disagree.
I know this is something dear to your heart, so I won't push it further.
Enjoy your Holiday.
suninphx,Quote:
Originally Posted by suninphx
Yes,Oct'11 i485 receipts include PWMB's. Looking at EB2IC PERM certifications after July-2007 this number is not significant between 15APR2007 to 15JUL2007 (~3.5k PERMS).
You can apply EB2:EB3, i140 denial ratio and any other factors to estimate possible EB2IC PWMB's for the three month period.
suninphx,Quote:
Originally Posted by suninphx
To the extent that we have to use Trackitt numbers, IMO it appears that if the 27% limit hasn't already been exceeded, it is pretty damn close to it.
Within the error margins, CO seems to have done a pretty good job as far as I can tell.
Veni,Quote:
Originally Posted by veni001
I agree with you.
October might have added 1.5-2.1k new EB2-IC I-485, depending on how aggressive a DD % is applied. That sort of number is too small to isolate from the normal variance between months.
Thanks Spec.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Yes I was talking about 27%. is it 27% of total quota?
I agree with Spec over here. When it will come to available SOFAD for CO to decide where cut-off dates would end up on retrogression, those 8K have to be considered. They came from this years quota. So this years cut off date will be determined by the Demand = SOFAD - 8K-PWMB visa use-Porting upto that time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
PWMB and Porting is discretionary and one can take their best guess to estimate.
Guys,
As I understand, the available total annual visa quota is 366,000 (140,000 + 226,000). Out of curiosity, I counted the total I-485 completions during Oct, 10 to Sept, 11 from the USCIS dashboard. I was expecting that number to be approximately same as the annual quota. But to my surprise, the total I-485 completions during year 2011 were 637,385. Why is there so much difference? Is the rejection rate that high?
vedu,Quote:
Originally Posted by vedu
Please note: Lot of other people can apply for AOS while in US besides EB&FB applicants!
On average US is welcoming 1 million immigrants(AOS+CP) every year!
Thanks Veni,
That makes sense. At the least, I also need to include I-485 applications generated by the diversity program.
Quote:
Originally Posted by veni001
referenceQuote:
Originally Posted by tackle
Thanks. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by tackle
Also got reply from Spec.
vedu,Quote:
Originally Posted by vedu
AOS applications and approvals come from many sources. For FY2010, the breakdown (according to DHS) was as follows for AOS approvals :
------------------ AOS FY2010
Immediate Relative -- 252,842
Employment Based ---- 136,010
Family Based --------- 26,279
Diversity ------------- 1,571
Refugees & Asylees -- 136,291
Others --------------- 13,583
Total --------------- 566,576
Refugees & Asylees -- 136,291
WOV
btw below EB numbers are only for AOS, so they don't include CP, hence we should not conclude they wasted numbers, just an observation, as my first reaction was 4k wasted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
suninphx,Quote:
Originally Posted by suninphx
Yes that is 27% of the 140k quota, or 37,800 visas in each of the first 3 quarters.
nishant,Quote:
Originally Posted by nishant2200
It is a pretty startling number, isn't it?
Thanks for reinforcing the fact that the numbers relate to AOS only. Since EB received extra numbers from FB in FY2010, the CP number was nearer 13k than 4k (in case people thought 4k seemed a bit low).
Kd2008
That post from ** (pappu) is so lame,
It's up to people what to do with the time, it's important to note that it was Q who first declared dates will move to atleast Mar,2008 in this fy. As per CO, the date movement will have huge movements till they get sufficient inventory and once we have the data, all the calculations and predictions will resume. It has already been proved with best accuracy that is possible.
their only policy is, give us money and don't ask questions otherwise
Absolutely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
And I am pretty sure that this category is not scrutinized as much, and such high numbers have to indicate misuse and fraud. I am not against the reason behind the category, there is a value in humanity. In my wildest dreams even I didn't anticipate asylum and refugee category to take even more AOS numbers than EB. There is no World War 3 going on.
Coming back to our discussion of numbers at hand, thanks for pointing out that EB got extra numbers that year from FB. It was kind of bothering to me that just 4k out of 140k for CP doesn't sound right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Spec thanks for posting, one good trend finally is that the pace of I140 approvals has calmed down and the backlog is in the same range. Vedu from the EB2 I/ perspective the collateral damage was already done in the last 3 months when the backlog came down by a full 20K from the peak.Quote:
Originally Posted by vedu
Thanks Spec,
That's quite a number! On a completely different note, I was surprised by one other observation on the dashboard. Total I-485 completions for October, 11 (47,736) were less than the completion numbers in October, 10 (48,570). This is strange considering the following three factors:
1. Last year visas were exhausted in the middle of September, 11 and many ROW applicants had to wait for October to get their cases cleared.
2. Unprecedented number of I-140 applications were cleared in August and September requiring additional visa numbers.
3. A lot of pre-adjudicated IC cases were cleared in October, 11.
But since I-485 numbers comes from many different categories (as you noted in your post), I guess we should not read too much into these numbers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanmani
Spec thanks; I would really agree with the 10K figure as approvals till Q1 2012, I believe you said in another post responding to me. The demand data as you said had 8225 while the inventory has 14K (EB2 I + C), since even this month EB2-I approvals are coming by even this month (Jul + Aug )they are coming after the demand data said near zero a month back. The real truth could probably be a average of the DD & Inventory which would be 11K. So 10K is probably the minimum that has been / will be consumed out of these years SOFAD by Dec 31st, the inventory may always have some problematic long running cases and some maybe adjusted for porting. Kanmani they had announced in early Sep that numbers are over.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Teddy,Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
I should have been more precise about the derivation of the figures.
8,075 represents the reported figure for EB2-IC to the end of 2007 from the October Demand Data document.
8,225 represents the numbers of EB2-IC from April 15, 2007 onwards reported in the May 27, 2011 USCIS Inventory (the latest available at the time).
As you said, subsequently the October 1, 2011 USCIS Inventory was released, which showed slightly lower numbers for that specific time period of 8,145.
As always, you have summed up everything beautifully.
The USCIS Inventory indicates that there are more cases that might become documentarily qualified than the 8,075 reported by DOS.
I agree with you that the USCIS numbers contain some dead cases and also that 10-11k is probably a more realistic figure.
Like you, I also think some attempt has been made in the latest Inventory to show known Porting cases as EB2.
So I found this online,
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/usc...00082ca60aRCRD
It gives a denial rate of about 50% for all the I140 for 2005 to 2010. Spec's calculations take about 20%. Is there a disconnect or am I missing some thing?
IATIAM
I know this issue has been beaten to death and I generally agree that the certified expired cases should be considered towards the calculations. But here is a question - what if some one files for PERM and does not proceed to the I140 stage. Does overall TR cover the cases like this?
We just allocate certain percentage to such no-show cases.
This is for EB1, i am sure we dont get this info for EB2/3.Quote:
Originally Posted by iatiam
As gkjppp noted, those statistics are for EB1A and EB1B.Quote:
Originally Posted by iatiam
I know we discussed this issue sometime last year. I think Veni may have derived a figure for EB2, but I can't remember for sure.
20% does feel about right for EB2 and is probably mainly driven by mismatches in PERM language and Educational equivalency issues.
If DOL and USCIS used the same criteria, the denial rate would be very low, since it is otherwise fairly quantitative. You either have a Masters or Bachelors + 5 or you don't and the job either requires it or not.
Again, this has been discussed previously. I believe the consensus was that the % of cases where a PERM was approved and no I-140 submitted within 180 days would be quite low.Quote:
Originally Posted by iatiam
Any allowance for it would be made within the other factors, rather than adding an additional one.
Personally, I already use 5 different variables per year, per Country - that is 50 variables already.
Please keep highlighting any issues you think about. We may not have discussed them and it is good to revisit some of the old ones from time to time to ensure the thinking is still valid.