Sounds like the classic puzzle.. At a fork on a village road, there are two people standing.. both named CO.. you can ask only 2 questions and find out which way would the VB would go..What should your questions be.. :-)Originally Posted by qblogfan
reminds me of this paradox - Schrödinger's cat [http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2815 ]
Last edited by belmontboy; 10-05-2011 at 11:19 AM.
So Qblogfan as per your logic, CO said in AILA conference that there is a zero chance of repeating 2007 scenario , making the COD current is impossible , Is the reverse going to be true?
Last edited by Kanmani; 10-05-2011 at 11:20 AM.
Let's start the refresh game now.
http://travel.state.gov/pdf/visabull...vember2011.pdf
Also I think they might have sent out employment verification letter requests to some applicants since these PDs are so old, and on failure of getting a response, finally sent a NOID or denial.
The request for an employment verification letter for old pre-adjudicated 485s might be compared to a ping call to check if the interface is still active.
Just a theory, since we are wondering on the data cleanup idea.
Can this be some FB visas spilled over...
That surely reminds me of the saying (no offence) "Geek shall inherit the earth".
let me throw in one of my favorites fellow physics lover.
In VB mechanics, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle states a fundamental limit on the accuracy with which certain pairs of physical properties of a particle, such as SOFAD and movement, can be simultaneously known. In other words, the more precisely one property is measured, the less precisely the other can be controlled, determined, or known.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle
There is one more: The more closer to equilibrium one gets, the more unstable the system becomes. It's like balance of the pen on its point or the nib. If it does get balanced exactly, it's perfect equilibrium, but even the infinitesimally small deviation from it, it's highly unstable.
None of the FB categories were current. If it is FB visas, then I think someone will have to answer an angry ombudsman or immigration organization etc, because it means some agency messed up and did not utilize FB properly. This would be my interpretation.
Thanks....
one of the post in other forum
if 2+2 = 4 then VB date should move into 2008, but if 2+2 = -3.412, then what? CO has his own math...
Ideally a person only gets one A # ever. If there are more than one, what they do is at the time of finalizing GC, they merge all your different "identities" and give you a final A #, which is based on the I-140.
For eg: I have a A# on my OPT card after my studies here, and a different A # on my I-140 approval notice. My lawyer is going to use/already uses (used it on my H1 extension), the A # on the I-140 approval.
Some how your post reminded me of BigB physics:
let me throw in one of my favorites fellow physics lover.
In VB mechanics, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle states a fundamental limit on the accuracy with which certain pairs of physical properties of a particle, such as SOFAD and movement, can be simultaneously known. In other words, the more precisely one property is measured, the less precisely the other can be controlled, determined, or known.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle
There is one more: The more closer to equilibrium one gets, the more unstable the system becomes. It's like balance of the pen on its point or the nib. If it does get balanced exactly, it's perfect equilibrium, but even the infinitesimally small deviation from it, it's highly unstable.
"You See. The Coefficient of the Linear, is juxtapositioned, by the haemoglobin of the atmospheric pressure in the country".
This is CM's analysis from US non-immgrant blogspot, credit to CM:
"Interesting? …may be not!!! In order to justify movement in r October VB of about 5100, DOS had to remove those numbers from the demand data. That does not mean in reality those visa are already allocated to the application. My perspective about this is nothing but number game. In order to move dates for next VBs, they have to reduce these numbers; and more surprisingly these numbers will reappear again to justify retrogression in January demand data (as long as DOS wants to intake new demand in 2 months) .
If they will really end up using 5600 annual quota for approving October cases then this would mean movement for rest of the year will only based on available quarterly spillover. This may not be good because then this mean that next movement will only happen as our friend suggested i.e. two big movement in Dec and Jan & then retrogression until July-August.
We will know in few weeks what DOS strategy is.
a) If these visa numbers were really allocated for Oct approvals then we should expect no movement next VB and we have to wait when qtrly spillover will be available.
b) If numbers where just removed to justify the movement for intake for FY 2012 and those numbers will reappear in next few demand data, then we should expect some big leap-ass movement in Nov VB."
I think the VB will be released sometime this week. There will not be any movement in November VB. By next month they will have better idea of how many more applications are pending before July 15, 2007 which will include PWMB. There will be BTM in December VB based on that data.
Why would be CO so kind to move dates first to July and then justify it with false information when he infact did nothing in August bulletin
that blog analysis seems unreal
Cumulative All Other
Demand Prior To China India Countries Grand Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------
January 1, 2007 0 25 0 25
January 1, 2008 1,525 1,150 0 2,675
January1, 2011 1,600 1,275 125 3,000
================================================== ===
What this 3,000 number represent?
Does it means that DOS only have 3K application pre-approved and ready to assign a GC number?
OR It means something else...
The whole scenario where china demand is lower than India is fishy. I can't buy into it. Something is wrong here.
Spec this is agreeable, provided that between 1st and 4th October, DoS has set aside those many numbers from 2012 quota towards backlog. An unusual step to say the least.
This is quite sensible explanation. If they move dates based on qly spillover (a first for DoS!!) then they don't have to make the category current. They can simply move the dates by the amount of spillover. Secondly it would also mean they can wait november and december out and then move dates in January or February. And then again in April or May.
Well ... if the demand data is dated Oct 4th, then they must have applied significant number (can somebody have prior month demand data and calculate exact number please?) in 4 days or at least set aside that much. Or otherwise basically the SOFAD was bigger in 2011 coupled with the fact that many people simply left GC and DoS could cancel those applications. Depending on how the demand data was reduced (2012 or 2011 numbers) the possibility of making it current can't be denied. At the least we know for sure that DoS recognizes what we have said over and over that by Q2 2012 the dates must move to Jan 2008. But looking at demand data I too got excited! Lets see if CO's VB bulletin pulls the Shrodinger CAT. On another physics side note - i think chaos theory could be quite useful in predicting VB movement and catastrophe theory will useful in explaining events like 2007 fiasco!!
I no longer provide calculations/predictions ever since whereismyGC.com was created.
I do run this site only as an administrator. Our goal is to improve clarity of GC process to help people plan their lives better.
Use the info at your risk. None of this is legal advice.
Forum Glossary | Forum Rules and Guidelines | If your published post disappeared, check - Lies and Misinformation thread
Can we expect the bulletin released today evening around 3.45 EST, just like last month's same day DD-VB release?
Q,
I think it is more an estimate of what will happen over the whole of the month, rather than the situation when it is published. The same was true for the large movements last year and we suspect not all those cases were actually approved.
I agree. Even with the COD movement to date, enough preadjudicated cases, let alone adding porting, are available to use the entire EB2-IC initial allocation.This is quite sensible explanation. If they move dates based on qly spillover (a first for DoS!!) then they don't have to make the category current. They can simply move the dates by the amount of spillover. Secondly it would also mean they can wait november and december out and then move dates in January or February. And then again in April or May.
Also CO said in the October VB that the forward movement was purely to generate demand:
CO is aware that significant demand exists beyond the current backlog. If made Current, Retrogression would not be a "distinct possibility" - it would be a certainty!! "Slowing" or "stopping" doesn't even come into the equation. I think that means a controlled forward movement, as we have been discussing.The rapid forward movement is intended to generate demand based on new filings for adjustment of status at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services offices, which currently accounts for over 85% of all Employment-based number use. Once the level of demand increases sufficiently, it may be necessary to slow or stop the cut-off movement, and a retrogression of the cut-offs at some point during the year is a distinct possibility.
The changes between the October and November Demand Data Reports were:Well ... if the demand data is dated Oct 4th, then they must have applied significant number (can somebody have prior month demand data and calculate exact number please?) in 4 days or at least set aside that much. Or otherwise basically the SOFAD was bigger in 2011 coupled with the fact that many people simply left GC and DoS could cancel those applications. Depending on how the demand data was reduced (2012 or 2011 numbers) the possibility of making it current can't be denied. At the least we know for sure that DoS recognizes what we have said over and over that by Q2 2012 the dates must move to Jan 2008. But looking at demand data I too got excited! Lets see if CO's VB bulletin pulls the Shrodinger CAT. On another physics side note - i think chaos theory could be quite useful in predicting VB movement and catastrophe theory will useful in explaining events like 2007 fiasco!!
China -- 1,650
India -- 3,725
Total -- 5,375
Without an irritant, there can be no pearl.
Current Trackitt Trend
EB1-C - 4
EB3 - 2
EB2 ROW - 5
EB2 - 9
Out of the 11 approvals 1 is a PWMB case, 4 are porting cases. This leaves 4 cases which became current in Oct and got approved. Overall the Eb2 approval trend seems to be good its split evenly between the newly current cases and older cases.
so what do you project for this bulletin from this?
Guys, I had a question regarding I-485 filing. I would appreciate any help.
I am EB2-I (PD: 10/10/2007) waiting to file I-485. I quit employer A (who filed my PERM/I-140) to join employer B in 2008. Last month employer B laid off 300 ppl and I was one of them, so I rejoined employer A. My H1-B transfer is still pending. If my PD becomes current, will I be able to file for I-485 through employer A (even though my h1b transfer is still pending). It would really suck if I had to wait till my h1b transfer was approved, which could take several months !!!
As far as I know, you can. Your GC is for future employment and hence you should be able to apply for 485. Double check with your lawyer.
Hey same PD for me too
Approval Notice of I-140, that you have, is all is needed to attach to I-485 application.
There are currently 8 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 8 guests)
Posting Permissions
