EB2 Predictions (Rather Calculations) - 2012

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy,

Thanks for your helping to all and this is 2nd post in this forum, here is my story!!!

My first labour July 23rd 2007 was filed and denied Oct 2008.2nd labour applied Nov 2008 and withdrew due to laywer mistake on Feb 15 2009.
3rd labour was applied Feb 26 2009 and approved Jan 2010 and H1B extended based 140and got 3 years validity until Oct 2013. (came to this conutry Aug 2005)

I dont have visa stmping in my passport from Oct 2008 and I dont go my home country since then due to so many factors (Always EVL models).

Loss
My father lost his leg due to sugar patient.
My younger brother got married two weeks ago
Rejected almost 5 full time offer's in different companies.
2nd boy was born July 2010 and No help from others incl from india due to visa issue-I managed my self .
We already booked the flight tickets on last month but sudden movement for Visa bulletin we postponed my wife trip to india due to attend some religios functions and also take of care of my 2nd boy to complete religious formalities.

Is it advisible to send my wife to india as this situvation also she need to attend stamping or can i wait and see next 2 bulletins and make decition but at any cost she have to go india before June either temp or even visa reject she is ok to stay india .

Sorry for the long story, please advise that will be useful for many families who suffer with out Visa stamping

My date is Feb 26 2009.

In the current situation even your wife should not go to India as she might have to go for stamping, there have been numerous cases where spouses have been stuck on 221G due to the EVC model. In fact chances of making it in the EVC model require a good degree of luck. I would say that you have a fair chance in the next VB; last VB was a tsunami you are quite close now only 25 days to the next VB to come. On a personal note I and my wife could not attend her sister’s wedding because it kind of happened too fast in Nov when our own dates became current, my stamping is valid till Sep 2012 though. My suggestion to you would be to have your family travel only in an emergency if you are this close and on EVC model till you get EAD / AP in hand if you van be current next month. If the dates retrogress then it’s a risk worth taking for now just hope for the best in the next VB.

[Spectator]

@ghostwriter - Thanks for going deep & dissecting it. You have actually classified the destruction into its 2 broad reasons a) Denial b) Abandonment for any reason. The factor of 2.125 was agreed after debating here on the forum. Actually the idea was purely to have a transformation factor from Perm to 485. Veni & Spec had worked quite extensively on the perm to 485 transformations and found a good correlation at 1, something like Karl Pearson's coefficient of correlation.
There could be several other factors like someone upgrading to EB1 or getting GC by FB or multiple perms but these are all hard to quantify so my idea was to have 1 factor kind of represent everything.
So it’s really a matter of terminology I would say Destruction means loss by all means i.e. either a) Denial b) Abandonment for any reason. Sun's idea of demand destruction is b) specifically as in 2008 the market situation was terrible compounded by perm issues (Later Half). Now another point to note is that we have CP as well which is not included in this transformation.
@Sun if this is agreeable
Transformation Factor - Ratio of expected 485 to perms.
Demand Destruction - Total loss in demand due to any reason from perm to I485.
Abandonment - Job Loss, leaving for any reason etc, something that was prevalent in 2008.
There is high likelihood that the transformation factor may be less post Jul 2007 because people did not have the cushion of EAD / AP. The factor of 1 comes from the first 6 months of 2007 as tonyromo had calculated. Sun I think the 2 of us have always understood your point has always been about “Abandonment”, somewhere the jargon has become confusing. If you have better terminology please propose.

Teddy. Thanks for summing it up.

Let me add my 2c worth and see if we agree.

a) Transformation Factor (TF)

The sum of factors that convert the raw PERM figures to the maximum number of I-485 applications that might be expected.

The factors taken into account are:

i) EB2%
ii) Approval rate at I-140
iii) Dependent ratio.

We all use slightly different figures. Currently, I use 65%, 80% & 2.05 which converts 1 PERM to 1.066 I-485.

b) Demand Destruction (DD)

Factors which might lower the numbers of I-485 calculated by the Transformation Factor.

These might be:

i) Multiple PERM
ii) Abandonment
etc.

In the tables I produced (what seems an age ago) I used 15% for PD2007 and 10% for PD2008. Those figures now seem somewhat optimistic, although I was also using an EB2% of 60%, which makes them slightly higher. The OR (see below) gave factors of 0.84 and 0.89 respectively.

c) Overall Ratio (OR)

The cumulative effect of Transformation Factor and Demand Destruction expressed as number of I-485 resulting per approved PERM.

Currently, I am using figures for DD of 40% for PD2007 and 35% for PD2008 to look at the low end of possible I-485 figures.

Based on the initial PERM numbers, this gives 1 PERM converts to 0.64 I-485 for PD 2007 and 0.69 I-485 for PD2008.

Even with those ratios, I get 40k potential EB2-IC I-485 for VB movement to date, including 250 Porting per month to the date the cases become ready for adjudication (2k total) and 1.5k cases from FY2011.

For an OR of about 0.8, which I have seen mentioned, the DD would need to be 25% for the TF factors I am using.

[GhostWriter]

Spec, one thing if you could clarify.
The way you lay out TF and DD, they can't be multiplied to get OR.
The DD you have is additive with ii in your TF. Basically an approved PERM will not convert to I-485 either because I-140 is denied or I-485 is denied or multiple PERM or job loss. Wouldn't it be better to lay out in the following way
Transformation Factor
(i) EB2%
(ii) % of Approved PERMs requiring a visa number = 1-(I140 denial rate + DD). Also the initial discussions with Teddy were assuming DD to be the terminology for cumulative effect of I-140 denial rate and multiple PERMs and job abandonment, but your terminology of calling the latter two unknowns as DD and keeping I140 denial rate separate seems better. That is the way many people think of demand destruction (i.e. not incorporating I140 denial rate in it).
(iii) Dependent ratio

Everything i have learnt is from this forum and your and other people's numbers, so feel free to disagree .


Also one question i had was that the I-140 denial rate of 80% is really the rejection rate and does not include other effects.

[Feb262009]

Hi Spec,
As usual, your explanation is very clear. I too wonder like ghostwriter how the numbers will change if you subtract DD.

Hi ghostwriter,
Excellent question. I would be interested in knowing spec's answer on how DD should be calculated.

In your last line of your question, 80% is approval rate , not denial rate.

Spec, one thing if you could clarify.
The way you lay out TF and DD, they can't be multiplied to get OR.
The DD you have is additive with ii in your TF. Basically an approved PERM will not convert to I-485 either because I-140 is denied or I-485 is denied or multiple PERM or job loss. Wouldn't it be better to lay out in the following way
Transformation Factor
(i) EB2%
(ii) % of Approved PERMs requiring a visa number = 1-(I140 denial rate + DD). Also the initial discussions with Teddy were assuming DD to be the terminology for cumulative effect of I-140 denial rate and multiple PERMs and job abandonment, but your terminology of calling the latter two unknowns as DD and keeping I140 denial rate separate seems better. That is the way many people think of demand destruction (i.e. not incorporating I140 denial rate in it).
(iii) Dependent ratio

Everything i have learnt is from this forum and your and other people's numbers, so feel free to disagree .


Also one question i had was that the I-140 denial rate of 80% is really the rejection rate and does not include other effects.

[Sandeep2011]

Dear friends,

My PD is Sept'07 and i filed my 485 in November. Got the 485 receipt notice earlier this week. I noticed that on receipt notice, priority date mentioned is December 6th, 2011 which is same as "Received Date".

The receipt also mentions "Please note that if a priority date is printed on this notice, the priority date does not reflect earlier retained priority dates".

I am not sure what this means. Is there any action that i need to take to inform USCIS about the mismatch in priority date? Any guidance on this will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

[neospeed]

For most of the cases on I-485 receipt , priority date will be the receipt notice. So no need to worry as I-485 and I -140 are tied up.

Dear friends,

My PD is Sept'07 and i filed my 485 in November. Got the 485 receipt notice earlier this week. I noticed that on receipt notice, priority date mentioned is December 6th, 2011 which is same as "Received Date".

The receipt also mentions "Please note that if a priority date is printed on this notice, the priority date does not reflect earlier retained priority dates".

I am not sure what this means. Is there any action that i need to take to inform USCIS about the mismatch in priority date? Any guidance on this will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

[codesmith]

What's the alien or A# ?
I'd gone for medica exam yesterday and doctor's office asked me to provide it for me and my family.
I've see mixed reviews about A#, is it i94 # or something else ?
Or can I keep it blank ?
Please let me know - what did you use and where did you get it from ?

* * I've posted this on 485 thread.
Thanks

[username]

Teddy/Others
can you please help understand how adjudication works.

PD: Dec 2007
I140 approved by company A which was acquired by Company B.
Filing 485 next week along with an amended I140 (due to acquisition).

My questions are;
1. What is the sequence of approval that take place. We will get EAD, then i 140 gets approved and 485 and get GC?
2. Will the I140 amendment process delay my GC. Premium processing of 140 is not allowed in my case.

Thanks,

Today my check got cashed (15 days of receipt date). What a relief with a request of interfiling/conversion/porting/etc. Note my lawyer did not file amended of I140.

[BBear123]

Teddy. Thanks for summing it up.

Let me add my 2c worth and see if we agree.

a) Transformation Factor (TF)

The sum of factors that convert the raw PERM figures to the maximum number of I-485 applications that might be expected.

The factors taken into account are:

i) EB2%
ii) Approval rate at I-140
iii) Dependent ratio.

We all use slightly different figures. Currently, I use 65%, 80% & 2.05 which converts 1 PERM to 1.066 I-485.

b) Demand Destruction (DD)

Factors which might lower the numbers of I-485 calculated by the Transformation Factor.

These might be:

i) Multiple PERM
ii) Abandonment
etc.

In the tables I produced (what seems an age ago) I used 15% for PD2007 and 10% for PD2008. Those figures now seem somewhat optimistic, although I was also using an EB2% of 60%, which makes them slightly higher. The OR (see below) gave factors of 0.84 and 0.89 respectively.

c) Overall Ratio (OR)

The cumulative effect of Transformation Factor and Demand Destruction expressed as number of I-485 resulting per approved PERM.

Currently, I am using figures for DD of 40% for PD2007 and 35% for PD2008 to look at the low end of possible I-485 figures.

Based on the initial PERM numbers, this gives 1 PERM converts to 0.64 I-485 for PD 2007 and 0.69 I-485 for PD2008.

Even with those ratios, I get 40k potential EB2-IC I-485 for VB movement to date, including 250 Porting per month to the date the cases become ready for adjudication (2k total) and 1.5k cases from FY2011.

For an OR of about 0.8, which I have seen mentioned, the DD would need to be 25% for the TF factors I am using.

Spectator, the organization of the gains and losses makes a lot of sense. This could be a stylistic point but wouldn't it be better to apply the dependent ratio after you account for Demand Destruction?

[suninphx]

Teddy. Thanks for summing it up.

Let me add my 2c worth and see if we agree.

a) Transformation Factor (TF)

The sum of factors that convert the raw PERM figures to the maximum number of I-485 applications that might be expected.

The factors taken into account are:

i) EB2%
ii) Approval rate at I-140
iii) Dependent ratio.

We all use slightly different figures. Currently, I use 65%, 80% & 2.05 which converts 1 PERM to 1.066 I-485.

b) Demand Destruction (DD)

Factors which might lower the numbers of I-485 calculated by the Transformation Factor.

These might be:

i) Multiple PERM
ii) Abandonment
etc.

In the tables I produced (what seems an age ago) I used 15% for PD2007 and 10% for PD2008. Those figures now seem somewhat optimistic, although I was also using an EB2% of 60%, which makes them slightly higher. The OR (see below) gave factors of 0.84 and 0.89 respectively.

c) Overall Ratio (OR)

The cumulative effect of Transformation Factor and Demand Destruction expressed as number of I-485 resulting per approved PERM.

Currently, I am using figures for DD of 40% for PD2007 and 35% for PD2008 to look at the low end of possible I-485 figures.

Based on the initial PERM numbers, this gives 1 PERM converts to 0.64 I-485 for PD 2007 and 0.69 I-485 for PD2008.

Even with those ratios, I get 40k potential EB2-IC I-485 for VB movement to date, including 250 Porting per month to the date the cases become ready for adjudication (2k total) and 1.5k cases from FY2011.

For an OR of about 0.8, which I have seen mentioned, the DD would need to be 25% for the TF factors I am using.

Spec,

Nice post.

If we do calculations based on this and add flavour of thought that 'DOS may be looking to collect 2 yr inventory' then current movement may well be justified. With assumption of avg. 25K SOFAD for FY2012 and FY2013 dates could move further into 2009 before they start retrogessing IMO.

[Spectator]

Spectator, the organization of the gains and losses makes a lot of sense. This could be a stylistic point but wouldn't it be better to apply the dependent ratio after you account for Demand Destruction?

BBear123,

It doesn't make any difference and is a personal choice.

I do it that way so that I can see the I-485 figures at all stages. Since I use 2.05 dependents, then Demand Destruction just lowers the I-485 number by 2.05 per I-140 that fails to complete the entire process.

It is equally valid to reduce it by 1 per I-140, then multiply by 2.05 later, as you suggest.

[Spectator]

Spec,

Nice post.

If we do calculations based on this and add flavour of thought that 'DOS may be looking to collect 2 yr inventory' then current movement may well be justified. With assumption of avg. 25K SOFAD for FY2012 and FY2013 dates could move further into 2009 before they start retrogessing IMO.

suninphx,

My post was in the spirit of the discussion that was requested, not to be prescriptive about it. I did want people to understand how I look at the terms. I am looking forward to that discussion continuing for a bit yet.

Based on the % DD I was mentioning, if CO ignores Porting, then 50k gives a Cut Off Date within touching distance of 01JAN10. That seems like a nice round figure and is exactly 1 year's further movement.

Who knows? I have given up trying to second guess CO.

[suninphx]

suninphx,

My post was in the spirit of the discussion that was requested, not to be prescriptive about it. I did want people to understand how I look at the terms. I am looking forward to that discussion continuing for a bit yet.

Based on the % DD I was mentioning, if CO ignores Porting, then 50k gives a Cut Off Date within touching distance of 01JAN10. That seems like a nice round figure and is exactly 1 year's further movement.

Who knows? I have given up trying to second guess CO.

Spec,

I understood from where you are coming from. I was just trying attach some rational to current movement using numbers in your post.

[BBear123]

BBear123,

It doesn't make any difference and is a personal choice.

I do it that way so that I can see the I-485 figures at all stages. Since I use 2.05 dependents, then Demand Destruction just lowers the I-485 number by 2.05 per I-140 that fails to complete the entire process.

It is equally valid to reduce it by 1 per I-140, then multiply by 2.05 later, as you suggest.

Got you and agreed its purely personal. I initially thought there was a better estimate at the front end of the calculation than the rear but now I realize that there are assumptions at either end.

Thanks for taking the time and great analysis.

[luckycub]

I've been reading all these discussions here with great gratitude...
--- So what is the rational prediction for next VB? Possible to end 2009 or early 2010?

[sdesh005]

I've been reading all these discussions here with great gratitude...
--- So what is the rational prediction for next VB? Possible to end 2009 or early 2010?

I'd be amazed if it gets that far! I think most gurus are saying that it is highly uncertain and unpredictable at this point as to what date would be current.

[manzoorraza]

I've been reading all these discussions here with great gratitude...
--- So what is the rational prediction for next VB? Possible to end 2009 or early 2010?

Luckycub,
Hopfully the trend will continue and we will see atleast few months. Personally hoping that it goes past past 1st may 09 but wouldnt hurt if it went all the way out to year end for 2009 or 2010........ just for your sake.
Hopes and prayers aside, it's anybody's guess right now where it will go. Best of luck to you.

[luckycub]

Luckycub,
Hopfully the trend will continue and we will see atleast few months. Personally hoping that it goes past past 1st may 09 but wouldnt hurt if it went all the way out to year end for 2009 or 2010........ just for your sake.
Hopes and prayers aside, it's anybody's guess right now where it will go. Best of luck to you.

Thanks. Let's pray and wish our wishes becomes true soon.

[manzoorraza]

Thanks. Let's pray and wish our wishes becomes true soon.

Keeping the fingers crossed. It was all going fine till this huge jump happened which caught a lot of people pleasntly off guard (who are now scrambling for paperwork) and others like us are who are now anxiously waiting for the next bulletin hoping praying wishing that we get to file and get the AP to travel freely. God forbid if we don't get current in Feb then god only knows how long this agonizing anxiety would last........don't even wanna think about it..........cruelty at its best.

[PDCurrent]

Hi,
I know this is the wrong thread, but this seems to be the most active thread of all...I am in a bit of situation. I have applie for my passport as minor and had some different signature then and after renewal i used the same signature, so tht it would be an issue, and now I have all my other documents with a different signature(i-20, OPT EAD Cards, Divers License). Will this be an issue while filing for i-485..If so any solutions??

Thanks in advance..

[ontheedge]

What's the alien or A# ?
I'd gone for medica exam yesterday and doctor's office asked me to provide it for me and my family.
I've see mixed reviews about A#, is it i94 # or something else ?
Or can I keep it blank ?
Please let me know - what did you use and where did you get it from ?

* * I've posted this on 485 thread.
Thanks

Its the A# on the I-140. Only you will have...it wont go on your derivatives' medical forms. And its not even mandatory.

[codesmith]

Its the A# on the I-140. Only you will have...it wont go on your derivatives' medical forms. And its not even mandatory.

Thanks for your reply, my attorney told me to keep it blank.

[manzoorraza]

Agree with ghost writer that everyone agrees on the 4 factors. Its just a matter of how one is comfortable with crunching numbers and what percentages one thinks appropriate. Also, life would be much simpler if there was a way to confirm what CO's assumption is on HR-3012 i.e. is he anticipating it to go through and getting ready for it or is the demand so low that he can afford to go in leaps and bounds. Personally, I want to believe the latter but it sounds too good to be true. Maybe we can do parallel scenarios in predictions - one with 3012 and the other without. Any takers?

Thanks for the clarification Spec. I understand your point now.
Also the two approaches are equivalent.
So lets say we have 100 EB2-IC approved PERMs. Assume that 20% I-140s get denied and 15% is demand destruction (job abandonment, multiple PERMs etc.).
No. of I485s can be calculated in two ways (simple set theory)
1. 100[1 - (0.2 + 0.15 - 0.2*0.15)] = 100[1-.32] = 68 (This is what i had suggested except i ignored the intersection term. There would be 3 people whose I140 would be denied and they would lose jobs, so the union of I140 denied and job abandoned is 20 + 15 - 3 = 32).
2. 100 * 0.8 * 0.85 = 68 (This is what you have and automatically takes care of the intersection. So a person will only reach I-485 if his I-140 is approved AND he doesn't abandon.)

So to simplyfy and not cause confusion I agree with what you laid out. The only thing is that the terminology between what you mentioned and Teddy's post on page 1 is different. There are four factors we are incorporating, the order does not matter since its simple multiplication.
1. % EB2
2. Approval rate at I-140
3. Dependent ratio
4. Demand destruction (Multiple PERM, Job loss etc).

You are calling the product of first three as TF, 4th as DD and product of all four as OR.

Teddy has the product of second and fourth combined labeled as Demand destruction. I think it would help if we agree on one definition and add it to the list of acronyms and refer it in a consistent way.

Overall i think we all understand the four factors and the calculations are similar.

[bhala5]

Thanks Teddy/ imdeng , I'll Pray god my PD will current next bulletin.
I will follow the way as per your advise!!!

[BBear123]

Agree with ghost writer that everyone agrees on the 4 factors. Its just a matter of how one is comfortable with crunching numbers and what percentages one thinks appropriate. Also, life would be much simpler if there was a way to confirm what CO's assumption is on HR-3012 i.e. is he anticipating it to go through and getting ready for it or is the demand so low that he can afford to go in leaps and bounds. Personally, I want to believe the latter but it sounds too good to be true. Maybe we can do parallel scenarios in predictions - one with 3012 and the other without. Any takers?

My 2 cents. I dont think HR.3012 has anything to do with priority date movement. Few reasons why.

1) The bill provides no new visas, just the removal of country based numerical limits for EB petitioners.
2) Bill doesn't kick in till 2015.
3) If at all the bill had an impact it should be on EB3 I/C and not EB2 as they have been waiting for a visa the longest. Am I missing something here?
4)If I had a high power political office, under a democratic president, I would likely not go act on anything immigration related, in an election year unless I am absolutely certain that the bill would pass. Not to mention the governments incentives to prevent any blowback from all of this.