EB2 Predictions (Rather Calculations) - 2012

[suninphx]

September 2012 Visa bulletin http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bul...etin_5759.html

EB2IC -- U
EB2ROWMP --01JAN09

Thanks Kanmani.
Good point is EB1 is still current.

[vishnu]

I like the fact that EB1 remains current... so the initial rumors that EB2 IC was over allocated spillover from EB1 can be put to rest.

[TeddyKoochu]

http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bul...etin_5759.html

September VB is out, good to see EB1 as current and EB2 ROW still available. Next milestone is when they announce that numbers are over for the year. For EB1 still cases filed as far back as 2011 are being approved.

[Spectator]

I like the fact that EB1 remains current... so the initial rumors that EB2 IC was over allocated spillover from EB1 can be put to rest.

Not at all, otherwise EB2-WW would not be retrogressed.

It just means that there are just enough visas for demand, helped by the extra 1.5k received by EB1 because of the increase in the overall allocation to 145k.

[vishnu]

Spec - when i mentioned overallocated, i did mean overallocating more visas to EB2 than what is required by EB1 itself...and that appears not to be the case.

[parsvnath]

All - My priority date is Feb 2008. When can I expect the GC?

[qesehmk]

well said. Agree.

It just means that there are just enough visas for demand,

On another note - check out the dates for F2A. They are in 2010 across the board.

We have said it many times on this forum and we repeat again - even this correction of counting dependent numbers from F2A as opposed to EB2 would significantly alleviate EB woes.

This is what F2A is:
A. (F2A) Spouses and Children of Permanent Residents: 77% of the overall second preference limitation, of which 75% are exempt from the per-country limit;

[ChampU]

If I understand the process and read the data correctly, we can safely assume that in Oct. bulletin:

1. The COD for EB2-ROW goes away and it becomes current again.
2. EB2- IC become available and have a COD of around July/August 2007.

For rest of the Fy-2013,
3. The COD for Q1-FY 2013 bulletins remain stagnant or have very marginal movement (< a month). This allows CO to judge the demand and have a ballpark estimate of the possible SO..
4. The COD moves to possibly end of CY-2007 by the end of Q2.. CO plays it safe and has enough wiggle room to accommodate demand spikes (if any) for the rest of the year..
5. In FY-Q3 and Q4, the COD moves anywhere between 3-15 months, depend on the demand..

Comments??

[openaccount]

If I understand the process and read the data correctly, we can safely assume that in Oct. bulletin:

1. The COD for EB2-ROW goes away and it becomes current again.
2. EB2- IC become available and have a COD of around July/August 2007.

For rest of the Fy-2013,
3. The COD for Q1-FY 2013 bulletins remain stagnant or have very marginal movement (< a month). This allows CO to judge the demand and have a ballpark estimate of the possible SO..
4. The COD moves to possibly end of CY-2007 by the end of Q2.. CO plays it safe and has enough wiggle room to accommodate demand spikes (if any) for the rest of the year..
5. In FY-Q3 and Q4, the COD moves anywhere between 3-15 months, depend on the demand..

Comments??

Agree with all of your points except 4th point

4.EB2ROW had COD for 2012-Q4 so there will be decent number of applications in Q1-2013(Q1-2013+Q4-2012) which would eventually convert to demand by Q2-2013, if this demand is less than what CO expects at that point of time then what you mentioned might happen.

[veni001]

D. DETERMINATION OF THE NUMERICAL LIMITS ON IMMIGRANTS REQUIRED UNDER THE TERMS OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT (INA)

The State Department is required to make a determination of the worldwide numerical limitations, as outlined in Section 201(c) and (d) of the INA, on an annual basis. These calculations are based in part on data provided by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) regarding the number of immediate relative adjustments in the preceding year and the number of aliens paroled into the United States under Section 212(d)(5) in the second preceding year. Without this information, it is impossible to make an official determination of the annual limits. To avoid delays in processing while waiting for the CIS data, the Visa Office (VO) bases allocations on the minimum annual limits outlined in Section 201 of the INA. On August 8th, CIS provided the required data to VO.

The Department of State has determined the Family and Employment preference numerical limits for FY-2012 in accordance with the terms of Section 201 of the INA. These numerical limitations for FY-2012 are as follows:

Worldwide Family-Sponsored preference limit: 226,000
Worldwide Employment-Based preference limit: 144,951

Under INA Section 202(A), the per-country limit is fixed at 7% of the family and employment annual limits. For FY-2012 the per-country limit is 25,967. The dependent area annual limit is 2%, or 7,419.

DOS published limit was 140k but EB received an additional 4,951 from FB spillover!

[yank]

DOS published limit was 140k but EB received an additional 4,951 from FB spillover!

So, these additional visas from FB will go to EB2-ROW and reduce it's backlog by 5K or will it go to EB1.

[qesehmk]

it doesn't matter eitherway. However one can say that since this is a new find on DoS' part, this will alleviate ROW retrogression and makes it a certainty that the dates will become current in October (unless HR3012 passes).

If HR3012 passes EB2ROW should expect further retrogression.

DOS published limit was 140k but EB received an additional 4,951 from FB spillover!

So, these additional visas from FB will go to EB2-ROW and reduce it's backlog by 5K or will it go to EB1.

[openaccount]

it doesn't matter eitherway. However one can say that since this is a new find on DoS' part, this will alleviate ROW retrogression and makes it a certainty that the dates will become current in October (unless HR3012 passes).

If HR3012 passes EB2ROW should expect further retrogression.

Spec/Q,

Do you know how SO from FB is distributed across EB and when is it allocated in FY2012 or FY2013. I believe it is used up in FY2012 most probably by EB2IC as this category consumed more.

[Spectator]

Spec/Q,

Do you know how SO from FB is distributed across EB and when is it allocated in FY2012 or FY2013. I believe it is used up in FY2012 most probably by EB2IC as this category consumed more.

It is allocated per the original % allocations to the EB Categories given in INA 203(b). It will be used this year FY2012 because the under use by FB occurred in FY2011.

EB1 - 28.6%
EB2 - 28.6%
EB3 - 28.6%
EB4 - 7.1%
EB5 - 7.1%


For 144,951 visas the split would be (extra in brackets):

EB1 - 41,456 - (1,456)
EB2 - 41,456 - (1,456)
EB3 - 41,456 - (1,456)
EB4 - 10,292 - (352)
EB5 - 10,291 - (351)

Total - 144,951 - 4,951

For EB1-EB3, 7% rises from 2,803 to 2,902 visas. and 7% over all EB rises from 9,800 to 10,147.

EB2 would have received an extra 1,807 spillover visas from EB1 & EB5. Whether EB4 is going to give any is unknown.

[ChampU]

Spec/Q,

Do you know how SO from FB is distributed across EB and when is it allocated in FY2012 or FY2013. I believe it is used up in FY2012 most probably by EB2IC as this category consumed more.

I don't have any data to back it up, but I think FB -> EB transfer occurs as a band aid to ensure the DoS meets its year end goals. e.g. The priorities for DoS for FY2012 might be to :
A. Ensure EB1 stays C
B. Provide enough visas to ensure that the backlog created by establishing a COD for EB2-ROW is addressed and the category remains C in the new FY. While the DoS cannot control the demand, they can always move visa numbers at their disposal.
5k is a large enough number to ensure both..

[openaccount]

It is allocated per the original % allocations to the EB Categories given in INA 203(b). It will be used this year FY2012 because the under use by FB occurred in FY2011.

EB1 - 28.6%
EB2 - 28.6%
EB3 - 28.6%
EB4 - 7.1%
EB5 - 7.1%


For 144,951 visas the split would be (extra in brackets):

EB1 - 41,456 - (1,456)
EB2 - 41,456 - (1,456)
EB3 - 41,456 - (1,456)
EB4 - 10,292 - (352)
EB5 - 10,291 - (351)

Total - 144,951 - 4,951

For EB1-EB3, 7% rises from 2,803 to 2,881 visas. and 7% over all EB rises from 9,800 to 10,147.

EB2 would have received an extra 1,807 spillover visas from EB1 & EB5. Whether EB4 is going to give any is unknown.

Spec,

Thank you & very informative post from you, as you do always especially with data

[ChampU]

It is allocated per the original % allocations to the EB Categories given in INA 203(b). It will be used this year FY2012 because the under use by FB occurred in FY2011.

EB1 - 28.6%
EB2 - 28.6%
EB3 - 28.6%
EB4 - 7.1%
EB5 - 7.1%


For 144,951 visas the split would be (extra in brackets):

EB1 - 41,456 - (1,456)
EB2 - 41,456 - (1,456)
EB3 - 41,456 - (1,456)
EB4 - 10,292 - (352)
EB5 - 10,291 - (351)

Total - 144,951 - 4,951

For EB1-EB3, 7% rises from 2,803 to 2,881 visas. and 7% over all EB rises from 9,800 to 10,147.

EB2 would have received an extra 1,807 spillover visas from EB1 & EB5. Whether EB4 is going to give any is unknown.

Spec:

A few questions regarding the numbers:

1. Are the 4951 numbers are distributed throughout the entire year or is it a last month/last quarter infusion?
2. If EB2 did receive the 1807 extra visas and with EB2 - IC being "U" since June, shouldn't the COD for EB2-ROW move, at least by a week? It hasn't moved since it was established in July.

Meanwhile, EB3 dates have been moving at a rate more than usual, since June.. It could be because of 1456 visas (or possibly more.. )

[Spectator]

The extra 5k visas in FY2012 is all very nice, but it doesn't fundementally change anything for next year.

The extra 1.5k available to EB1 may, or may not have saved having to impose a Cut Off Date within EB1 this year, but it doesn't really matter since the numbers were only ever going to be quite low anyway.

EB2-WW will still have been retrogressed for 3 months and 6-8k approvals will now take place in FY2013 instead of FY2012 (unless the backlog is allowed to increase).

Assuming it represents a real increase in EB2-WW approvals next year, that reduces the spillover to EB2-I by the same amount (unless spillover is extremely high, EB2-C won't receive any).

I know it essentially all irons out in the wash, since there were extra approvals in FY2012, but they weren't exactly strictly by PD order were they?

6-8k represents a significant % of any spillover for FY2013 and several months movement for EB2-I. Unlike Q, I do not think EB2-I can look forward to historic levels of spillover visas in FY2013. I fear it is going to be a very difficult year, unfortunately IMO.

(hope that doesn't sound too much like a prediction suninphx)

[vizcard]

Spec - I hope you don't have a job writing fortune cookies :P

On a more serious note, I believe the reality is somewhere between Q and Spec's analysis. There is usually some unplanned event that results in date predictions getting screwed. (Note I said dates and not numbers). I don't count HR3012 in that "unplanned event" bucket.

[Spectator]

Spec:

A few questions regarding the numbers:

1. Are the 4951 numbers are distributed throughout the entire year or is it a last month/last quarter infusion?
2. If EB2 did receive the 1807 extra visas and with EB2 - IC being "U" since June, shouldn't the COD for EB2-ROW move, at least by a week? It hasn't moved since it was established in July.

Meanwhile, EB3 dates have been moving at a rate more than usual, since June.. It could be because of 1456 visas (or possibly more.. )

ChampU,

The only reason we have only just found out about the extra visas is that DOS rely on getting some information from USCIS to "officially" set the FB limit (immediate relative adjustments in the preceding year and number of parolees in the second preceding year). The September VB confirms that USCIS were even later than usual supplying that information:

These calculations are based in part on data provided by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) regarding the number of immediate relative adjustments in the preceding year and the number of aliens paroled into the United States under Section 212(d)(5) in the second preceding year. Without this information, it is impossible to make an official determination of the annual limits. To avoid delays in processing while waiting for the CIS data, the Visa Office (VO) bases allocations on the minimum annual limits outlined in Section 201 of the INA. On August 8th, CIS provided the required data to VO.

However, the exact numbers do not alter the fact that FB would get 226,000 anyway because the calculation is always going to default to the minimum number of 226,000 because of how the calculation is made. I covered this in a post a few pages back.

DOS knew the number of FB approvals in FY2011 shortly after FY2011 closed, so they also knew that EB had an allocation of about 145k for FY2012. DOS normally publish the Visa Report in January, but waited until August this year for some unknown reason.

With the possible exception of October, IMO the visas have been allocated all year by DOS with the certain knowledge of the higher number available.

There is no thought in my mind that this "news" has had any effect in the last quarter or last month.

I hope that answers your question.

[suninphx]

(hope that doesn't sound too much like a prediction suninphx)

Spec - .

Thanks for numbers

[redsox2009]

The Department of State has determined the Family and Employment preference numerical limits for FY-2012 in accordance with the terms of Section 201 of the INA. These numerical limitations for FY-2012 are as follows:

Worldwide Family-Sponsored preference limit: 226,000
Worldwide Employment-Based preference limit: 144,951

Under INA Section 202(A), the per-country limit is fixed at 7% of the family and employment annual limits. For FY-2012 the per-country limit is 25,967. The dependent area annual limit is 2%, or 7,419.

Based on this, do we have to assume that there will be country limit both FB and EB combined together?

from where did this new 4951 visas come from?

Can someone throw light on this.

[chengisk]

Please check some of the previous posts, including, http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showth...9242#post29242 and the replies to that one.

[vizcard]

The Department of State has determined the Family and Employment preference numerical limits for FY-2012 in accordance with the terms of Section 201 of the INA. These numerical limitations for FY-2012 are as follows:

Worldwide Family-Sponsored preference limit: 226,000
Worldwide Employment-Based preference limit: 144,951

Under INA Section 202(A), the per-country limit is fixed at 7% of the family and employment annual limits. For FY-2012 the per-country limit is 25,967. The dependent area annual limit is 2%, or 7,419.

Based on this, do we have to assume that there will be country limit both FB and EB combined together?

from where did this new 4951 visas come from?

Can someone throw light on this.

The per country limit is based on combined FB and EB which is why South Korea EB2 never has a COD even though they use more than allocated EB visas. The additional 5K visas come from the FB quota. Spec and others have discussed this a few posts previously.

[Eb2_Dec07]

Spec, Q , Veni , Teddy ,

Would you guys please provide your take on predictions for 2013 and any possible surprises etc etc .

Understand lots of number crunching that went thanks to all gurus specially Spec for amazing clarity.