EB2 Predictions (Rather Calculations) - 2012

[Reader]

So there is a 60 days inbetween the date of last paystub and the date of COS application received by USCIS right ?

If so, only 60 days period is counted against status violation .

Sorry, let me give you the complete sequence.

1. H4 to H1 approved effective Oct 1st, 2007
2. Company paid starting from March 1st, 2008.
3. W2 available for 2008 which is 2 months lesser than LCA wage. Do not have the pay stubs for 2008 as we did not save them.
4. Worked until March 2009 and converted to H4 effective April 1st 2009. W2 and pay stubs available for 2009.


Now the entire duration of out of status is 150 days. However, since we don't have the pay stubs for 2008 and W2 does not clearly tell whether it was 2 months without pay or underpaid for the entire year.

[mesan123]

Hi Nishanth, Q ,spec,and GURU's. i know we have less data at this point. as dec fillers are getting approvals and as CO mentioned he is not planning on retrogression ( as per AILA Meeting with Mr.CO) thill end of summer.

what would be the retrogression point? will be mid of 2008 or early 2009???

sandeep, 45% by end of february means 9% each month they are following, and they are fine with visas running out anytime in the last month of FY (September), but they don't want situation wherein there are visas wasted.

So even if they meet the 11% goal in February itself, which is 2% more than targeted per month, so that they catch up to 9% for the five months each month gone by so far, we still have 9% for March, and so on each month. As long as EB2ROW and EB1 visa demand remains low, which it looks like it is, and also whenever hopefully we get a morphine shot from the EB5 bonus, December filers should fare fine.

In fact, starting next month, I won't be surprised if even a few lucky handful of January filers get into the extremely lucky 2 month approval case, as long as they don't get RFE and have had an early 1 month FP.

[username]

It is due to the bench pay. Therefore, the w2 is off by 2 months worth of salary compared to the LCA prevailing wage. Now, my main question is how will USCIS treat the difference i.e. that it was 2 months with out pay (60 day violation) or underpaid for the entire year (360 day violation).

I don't think USCIS will go into this depth of comparing W2 with LCA. I never heard about anybody reporting this kind of issue even recently USA had worst recession period. Don't worry about this issue and just relax.

[GCHopes]

I am starting to think, there is an additional criteria beyond not filing for EAD/AP. Are they also looking at how long have we stayed with the current company? In all the recent cases posted on Trackitt, further comments indicate that they all have been with the same company that filed for Green Card, for more than 4 years. Could that have something to do with processing times? Just thinking out loud!

A Trackitt user got greened in 37 days. PD: 12/20/2007, RD: 01/04/2012. The guy believes that his case was processed so quickly because he did not apply for EAD/AP. In any case, we now have our first Jan filer approved. This is weird considering there are so many Nov and Dec filers still waiting.
Link to details if you are interested: http://www.trackitt.com/usa-immigrat.../i485-eb/26152

[Kanmani]

150 days period was from oct 1st 2007 to feb 29 2008, so she was out of status for 150 days only not for the entire 2008. In case if you may be need to prove the status for the entire period of her stay , you need the copies of paystubs for 2008 .

You can get them from her ex employer or if possible/applicable you can even request the pay check company with her employee id number to get the copies .

Sorry, let me give you the complete sequence.

1. H4 to H1 approved effective Oct 1st, 2007
2. Company paid starting from March 1st, 2008.
3. W2 available for 2008 which is 2 months lesser than LCA wage. Do not have the pay stubs for 2008 as we did not save them.
4. Worked until March 2009 and converted to H4 effective April 1st 2009. W2 and pay stubs available for 2009.


Now the entire duration of out of status is 150 days. However, since we don't have the pay stubs for 2008 and W2 does not clearly tell whether it was 2 months without pay or underpaid for the entire year.

[fedupwithgc]

I think the dates moving back is not going to impact us a lot due to 2 reasons
Ususally they move the dates back because they cant take teh case load. but in our case case load has already been generated. Historically, EB3 porting and PERM delay caused lead to case delays and USCIS doesnt want to overload themselves,so they move dates very slow in last 4 yours.

EB3 after July 2007 is low,so porting is minimal and most of EB3 porting will be before July 2007 so dates retrogression to control porting is ruled out.

PERM delays upto 1 year and MTR for I140 used to cause too much delays, but people upto early 2009 are 90% clear so demand wont increase much in upcoming months for atleast mid 2009.

So stalling dates around 2010 or retrogression to somewhere around end of 2008 or early 2009 will have same effect. Now how many people will get through by end of FY12 is the point, which looking at the data I believe atleast mid 2008 and if same trend follows FY13 should jump into mid 2010.


I conclude by saying no porting and no late filers in these recent months, if USCIS and DOS can keep up with the inventory and DD, we can track the movement more confidently.

[imdeng]

Well - here is my opinion - we are already into a situation where lucky Mar-08 PD people are getting approved. So for me, this is the baseline for retrogression (the worst case). Now, some part of Jan filers (15-Mar-2008 to 31-Dec 2008 PD) will get approved this FY but I don't see them getting into Feb filers before the FY numbers run out. So my best expectation for retrogression is 1-Jan-2009. Within that range, any point between 15-Mar-2008 to 1-Jan-2009 is possible as a retrogression stop point.

Hi Nishanth, Q ,spec,and GURU's. i know we have less data at this point. as dec fillers are getting approvals and as CO mentioned he is not planning on retrogression ( as per AILA Meeting with Mr.CO) thill end of summer.

what would be the retrogression point? will be mid of 2008 or early 2009???

[vizcard]

imdeng... retrogression to Jan 1, 2009 implies that everyone before that will get a GC (right?)...unless there's RFE and such. I don't think thats reasonable.

[imdeng]

The only situation retrogression will happen is when USCIS demands more visa numbers than DOS has available for FY12. Then DOS, in an attempt to keep visa issuance within the limit, will retrogress to a level that will allow them to issue visas without wasting visa numbers.

Retrogression has nothing to do with case load. It is only for the purpose of regulating the number of visas issued in a year so that USCIS/DOS consume all available visas, do not exceed visa quotas and do not waste visa numbers.

I think the dates moving back is not going to impact us a lot due to 2 reasons
Ususally they move the dates back because they cant take teh case load. but in our case case load has already been generated. Historically, EB3 porting and PERM delay caused lead to case delays and USCIS doesnt want to overload themselves,so they move dates very slow in last 4 yours.

EB3 after July 2007 is low,so porting is minimal and most of EB3 porting will be before July 2007 so dates retrogression to control porting is ruled out.

PERM delays upto 1 year and MTR for I140 used to cause too much delays, but people upto early 2009 are 90% clear so demand wont increase much in upcoming months for atleast mid 2009.

So stalling dates around 2010 or retrogression to somewhere around end of 2008 or early 2009 will have same effect. Now how many people will get through by end of FY12 is the point, which looking at the data I believe atleast mid 2008 and if same trend follows FY13 should jump into mid 2010.


I conclude by saying no porting and no late filers in these recent months, if USCIS and DOS can keep up with the inventory and DD, we can track the movement more confidently.

[nishant2200]

Well - here is my opinion - we are already into a situation where lucky Mar-08 PD people are getting approved. So for me, this is the baseline for retrogression (the worst case). Now, some part of Jan filers (15-Mar-2008 to 31-Dec 2008 PD) will get approved this FY but I don't see them getting into Feb filers before the FY numbers run out. So my best expectation for retrogression is 1-Jan-2009. Within that range, any point between 15-Mar-2008 to 1-Jan-2009 is possible as a retrogression stop point.

I completely agree with you.

[imdeng]

That is why Jan 1, 2009 is my best case - it can happen if there is severe Demand Destruction in 2008 PDs - but it is unlikely.

imdeng... retrogression to Jan 1, 2009 implies that everyone before that will get a GC (right?)...unless there's RFE and such. I don't think thats reasonable.

[kd2008]

The only situation retrogression will happen is when USCIS demands more visa numbers than DOS has available for FY12. Then DOS, in an attempt to keep visa issuance within the limit, will retrogress to a level that will allow them to issue visas without wasting visa numbers.

Retrogression has nothing to do with case load. It is only for the purpose of regulating the number of visas issued in a year so that USCIS/DOS consume all available visas, do not exceed visa quotas and do not waste visa numbers.

You are right, imdeng. This is why, Mr. CO probably would rather consume all visas available and then make EB2IC "unavailable" for, may be, last two months of the fiscal year - provided there is enough demand from EB2ROW for those two months. The situation is quite dynamic and very different from earlier july 2007 fiasco buildup after which USCIS was sitting on a pile of pre-adjudicated cases.

Folks from any of the dates could get their GC if USCIS is able to process them and that particular PD is current at the time of approval. Yes, that means a few 2009 folks may also see approvals.

[mygreen]

Spec,

Wow, Terrific Data yet again from Big S. I always wonder if you work for CIS/DOS to get such great data? Anyways very helpful.

One question, Even I've see folks claiming TSC approvals with PD Jan 2008 (1),Feb 2008(1), Mar 2008(2). But don't you doubt the reliability of the claims? I suspect this because not many approvals with PD of Dec 2007. Given this, do you think TSC would have picked Mar 2008 application and adjudicate??

Thanks

I know some people are interested in the level of new applications, approvals, where those approvals are from and what date the approval PD is.

I am thinking of adding this data to the FACTS & DATA area and keeping it updated, if it is of interest to people.

Here's the recent data . Let me know whether you think it is a good idea or not and whether you would look at it.

Applications Since October 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- % Approvals for Applications Submitted Since October 2011

PD -------------------- Total --- NSC --- TSC --- CSC --- VSC ............... Visa Bulletin --------------- NSC ------ TSC ------ CSC ------ VSC
FY2011 ------------------- 28 ---- 10 ---- 18 ----- 0 ----- 0 ............... FY2011 ------------------- 35.71% --- 64.29% ---- 0.00% ---- 0.00%
October VB -------------- 124 ---- 18 --- 106 ----- 0 ----- 0 ............... October VB --------------- 14.52% --- 85.48% ---- 0.00% ---- 0.00%
November VB ------------- 381 --- 132 --- 244 ----- 3 ----- 2 ............... November VB -------------- 34.65% --- 64.04% ---- 0.79% ---- 0.52%
December VB ------------- 414 --- 169 --- 236 ----- 3 ----- 6 ............... December VB -------------- 40.82% --- 57.00% ---- 0.72% ---- 1.45%
January VB -------------- 426 --- 152 --- 260 ----- 8 ----- 6 ............... January VB --------------- 35.68% --- 61.03% ---- 1.88% ---- 1.41%
February VB ------------- 169 ---- 50 --- 110 ----- 3 ----- 6 ............... February VB -------------- 29.59% --- 65.09% ---- 1.78% ---- 3.55%

Total ----------------- 1,542 --- 531 --- 974 ---- 17 ---- 20 ............... All Apps ----------------- 34.44% --- 63.16% ---- 1.10% ---- 1.30%


Approvals for Applications Submitted Since October 2011 ----------------------------- % Approvals for Applications Submitted Since October 2011

Visa Bulletin --------- Total --- NSC --- TSC --- CSC --- VSC ............... Visa Bulletin -- Total ------ NSC ------ TSC ------ CSC ------ VSC
FY2011 -------------------- 7 ----- 3 ----- 4 ----- 0 ----- 0 ............... FY2011 -------- 25.00% --- 30.00% --- 22.22% ---- 0.00% ---- 0.00%
October VB --------------- 51 ---- 10 ---- 41 ----- 0 ----- 0 ............... October VB ---- 41.13% --- 55.56% --- 38.68% ---- 0.00% ---- 0.00%
November VB -------------- 86 ---- 41 ---- 44 ----- 1 ----- 0 ............... November VB --- 22.57% --- 31.06% --- 18.03% --- 33.33% ---- 0.00%
December VB -------------- 10 ----- 5 ----- 5 ----- 0 ----- 0 ............... December VB ---- 2.42% ---- 2.96% ---- 2.12% ---- 0.00% ---- 0.00%
January VB ---------------- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ............... January VB ----- 0.00% ---- 0.00% ---- 0.00% ---- 0.00% ---- 0.00%
February VB --------------- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ............... February VB ---- 0.00% ---- 0.00% ---- 0.00% ---- 0.00% ---- 0.00%

Total ------------------- 154 ---- 59 ---- 94 ----- 1 ----- 0 ............... All Apps ------- 9.99% --- 11.11% ---- 9.65% ---- 5.88% ---- 0.00%

Approvals by PD Month for FY2012 VB

PD -------------------- Total --- NSC --- TSC --- CSC --- VSC
April 15 2007 - ----------- 6 ----- 0 ----- 6 ----- 0 ----- 0
May 2007 ----------------- 15 ----- 2 ---- 13 ----- 0 ----- 0
June 2007 ---------------- 26 ----- 8 ---- 18 ----- 0 ----- 0
July 2007 ---------------- 19 ----- 2 ---- 17 ----- 0 ----- 0
August 2007 -------------- 21 ---- 11 ---- 10 ----- 0 ----- 0
September 2007 ----------- 20 ---- 12 ----- 8 ----- 0 ----- 0
October 2007 ------------- 30 ---- 16 ---- 13 ----- 1 ----- 0
November 2007 ------------- 1 ----- 0 ----- 1 ----- 0 ----- 0
December 2007 ------------- 3 ----- 3 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0
January 2008 -------------- 3 ----- 2 ----- 1 ----- 0 ----- 0
February 2008 ------------- 1 ----- 0 ----- 1 ----- 0 ----- 0
March 2008 ---------------- 2 ----- 0 ----- 2 ----- 0 ----- 0
April 2008 ---------------- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0
May 2008 ------------------ 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0
June 2008 ----------------- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0 ----- 0

Post Apr 15 PD Appr. ---- 147 ---- 56 ---- 90 ----- 1 ----- 0
Post July PD Approvals --- 81 ---- 44 ---- 36 ----- 1 ----- 0
All Approvals ----------- 154 ---- 59 ---- 94 ----- 1 ----- 0

[tatikonda]

Hi Gurus,

can you guys throw some light on possible April VB ..
What are your predictions ??

Regards
Tatikonda

[nishant2200]

Found this link from USCIS website:

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/A...M/0-0-0-1.html

It is public version of adjudicator's field manual.

let's see if we find some useful info in it.

[krishnav]

This is looks interesting.

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/A...html#0-0-0-292

But, it doesnt say anything about why certain cases would be approved before others, unless they received them before others. But we are seeing some cases approved from latest bulletins before older PD's. So, even though they say
Receipt date is the only criteria, I am not sure if that is being followed. Am I missing something??

Found this link from USCIS website:

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/A...M/0-0-0-1.html

It is public version of adjudicator's field manual.

let's see if we find some useful info in it.

[aguy007]

I had a similar question - see post 20654 http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showth...0654#post20654

It will be nice to hear from those who are getting approvals "out-of-turn" if they did something extra or different along with sending their application. Of course, if there is such a thing and everyone starts following it, then it is back to square one

This is looks interesting.

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/A...html#0-0-0-292

But, it doesnt say anything about why certain cases would be approved before others, unless they received them before others. But we are seeing some cases approved from latest bulletins before older PD's. So, even though they say
Receipt date is the only criteria, I am not sure if that is being followed. Am I missing something??

[nishant2200]

I found following helpful areas:


http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/A...html#0-0-0-276

* An IBIS query on a new application/petition must be run within 15 calendar days of initial receipt.

* In addition to the initial query, an IBIS query must be conducted at any of the following times, if evidence of

the IBIS query indicates it is no longer current (i.e. more than 180 days old):


· At the time of decision;


· At the time temporary evidence of lawful permanent residence is provided to an alien, such as an I-551 stamp

in a passport or an I-551 stamp placed on a Forms I-94 ;


· Prior to issuing documentation for a benefit (e.g., a Form I-130 approval notice); or


· At the time documentation of a granted benefit is issued to an alien, such as an Employment Authorization

Document or a Form I-512 .

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/A...html#0-0-0-851

* Note: Interim benefits include the ability to remain in the U.S. while their application is pending when they

would otherwise have no legal basis to remain, employment authorization, or advance parole. If the case is missing

initial evidence and we promptly send an RFE for such evidence, it stops the clock for eligibility for an EAD, and

the clock will start over when we receive it or the time expires. Similarly, we want to try to identify any common

additional evidence that might be required, because our sending a notice requesting that evidence will stop the

processing clock. Conducting this initial review early, and not simply issuing EADs and advance paroles on

incomplete applications, is a basic premise of both the Dallas Office Rapid Adjustment (DORA) up-front pilot which

we are running in our Dallas office and the NBC process.

* http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/A...html#0-0-0-316

From time to time, you may have need to translate a document which is relevant to a case but not submitted as part

of the supporting documents. In other instances, you may have reason to suspect the accuracy of a translation

which has been submitted. Some offices have access to translation services provided by employees or others. In

addition, USCIS officers may request translation services for documents in all major languages from the New York

District Office. [(b)(2) or (b)(7)(E)]


http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/A...html#0-0-0-341

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/A...html#0-0-0-859

* Research websites listed

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/A...html#0-0-0-381


* Note
For employment based cases, an Affidavit of Support is required only if the intending immigrant will work for a

relative who is eligible to file a Form I-130 on behalf of the intending. Therefore, for purposes of the Affidavit

of Support, a relative is defined as (1) a U.S. citizen or LPR who is the intending immigrant’s spouse, parent,

child, adult son or daughter, or (2) a U.S. citizen who is the intending immigrant’s brother or sister.

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/A...html#0-0-0-691 (AP)

* · G-325A checks shall be made unless the file reflects that such checks were previously made or the

applicant is a Cuban national in possession of an appointment letter furnished by a U.S. consular officer in

Nassau, Bahamas, or Port-of Spain, Trinidad, advising him to apply for Form I-512. However, in the case of an

alien departing under emergent circumstances, checks may be made on a post-audit basis.

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/A...html#0-0-0-292

* (b) Cases Held for Submission of Additional Information . [Chapter 10.11(b) update effective June 18, 2007.]


When an application or petition provides insufficient information to make a decision, USCIS may request additional evidence. The request for evidence or notice of intent to deny must be in writing and must specify the type of evidence required. The request must state whether initial evidence or additional evidence is required. Alternatively, the basis for the proposed denial must give the applicant or petitioner adequate notice and sufficient information to respond. The request for evidence or notice of intent to deny must indicate the deadline for response. See 8 CFR 103.2(b)(8) .


USCIS may hold the case in abeyance while waiting for the applicant or petitioner to respond. However, the maximum response time for a request for evidence cannot exceed 12 weeks, and for a notice of intent to deny cannot exceed 30 days. Additional time to respond to a request for evidence or notice of intent to deny may not be granted. See 8 CFR 103.2(b)(8) .


If USCIS receives a response, or the time to submit a response elapses, the case shall be returned to its original processing place. Returning the file to the original processing place will normally make the case ready for immediate adjudication.

[vizcard]

So I have a question for the board. For now this is hypothetical but it will be real pretty soon for my wife.
- H status expired
- EAD / AP in hand
- 485 pending

If you had to fill out a form asking for status in the US (Permanent Resident, Worker, Visitor, Student) ..what would you fill ? If none of these..what would you fill out.

[Spectator]

I wonder whether the recent upturn in EB2-IC approvals is an attempt by USCIS to convince DOS that they have the capacity to adjudicate sufficient applications to use up the available visas.

CO mentioned previously that part of his discussions with USCIS was not to have so big an Inventory that USCIS would have to reissue AP and EAD documents.

For USCIS, that is time and resource without any income. USCIS may be signalling that they do not want further forward movement.

If that is the reason, and CO notes it, then it makes an end to the forward movement of Cut Off Dates more likely.

Even at the lowest OR, with the known Cut Off Date movement, there are already sufficient likely applications to cover 2 years of approvals.

If all cases were approved, then Cut Off Dates might be set at around March 2008 by the end of FY2012.

However, in order to use the numbers, I think USCIS is going to have to "pick the low hanging fruit", which makes it likely that dates might not retrogress earlier than late 2008. The high RFE rate makes this even more likely IMO.

The danger of more severe retrogression at some point probably lies in adjudications outstripping the numbers available for Q3 spillover. I would say that is a medium/low risk, depending on the performance of other Categories/Countries.

[nishant2200]

I agree. I think if dates are current, anyone who is ready and an IO got his hands on the file maybe approved. It's lucky draw, however much they want to say its FIFO. And that is exactly why sometimes DOS would have to do retrogression, to regulate and throttle the visa usage in order of PD.

This is looks interesting.

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/A...html#0-0-0-292

But, it doesnt say anything about why certain cases would be approved before others, unless they received them before others. But we are seeing some cases approved from latest bulletins before older PD's. So, even though they say
Receipt date is the only criteria, I am not sure if that is being followed. Am I missing something??

[nishant2200]

Spec, see Ron Gotcher's post, he also is thinking similarly.

http://www.immigration-information.c...ad.php?t=16316

"Very interesting. They must have received assurances from the USCIS that they intend to approve more AOS cases in the next month."

I wonder whether the recent upturn in EB2-IC approvals is an attempt by USCIS to convince DOS that they have the capacity to adjudicate sufficient applications to use up the available visas.

CO mentioned previously that part of his discussions with USCIS was not to have so big an Inventory that USCIS would have to reissue AP and EAD documents.

For USCIS, that is time and resource without any income. USCIS may be signalling that they do not want further forward movement.

If that is the reason, and CO notes it, then it makes an end to the forward movement of Cut Off Dates more likely.

Even at the lowest OR, with the known Cut Off Date movement, there are already sufficient likely applications to cover 2 years of approvals.

If all cases were approved, then Cut Off Dates might be set at around March 2008 by the end of FY2012.

However, in order to use the numbers, I think USCIS is going to have to "pick the low hanging fruit", which makes it likely that dates might not retrogress earlier than late 2008. The high RFE rate makes this even more likely IMO.

The danger of more severe retrogression at some point probably lies in adjudications outstripping the numbers available for Q3 spillover. I would say that is a low risk.

[krishnav]

I again see this same trend today (Monday)

I have seen a bunch of approvals on Thrusday, Friday and Saturday each but today(Monday) I only see 1 approval unless people didnt add to trackitt.
Will have to see how the approvals go tomorrow and day after...If they trend remains same for the next two days and starts to pick up again by the second half...I can guarantee they are shifting some employees to deal with other case over the first half of the week and getting them back to approve 485's by the second half of the week.

Just realized its Lincoln's birthday today and some of the state agencies have a holiday (atleast in California). So, it could be that TSC has a holiday today.
But its strage there is a case added in trackitt with todays approval date.

I was looking at the approvals from TSC in trackitt for the past 3-4 weeks and it seems like they are more active (More i485 approvals) on Thursday, Friday and Saturday of every week.
I am wondering if they ask more employees to deal with I140s and other cases on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and ask them to jump back to I485 cases by the second half of the week.
Just a wild guess from the numbers in trackkitt.

Assuming its true, hopefully we will see more approvals tomorrow and day after also.
Good luck!!

[Desperate8]

Can one work for two employers on EAD.

Now that we have our EAD can we work with our current employer and also work Part Time for other employer ? Can I have multiple W2's / paystubs generated.

Or are we tied to only one employer ?

[krishnav]

Hello All,

I just received my 485 approval email but I have not recieved an approval email for my wife yet. Is this normal?
I am the primary applicant. I thought both of us should generally get the emails together. I checked her case online and it still says Initial Review.
Any thoughts?

I will update if I see any emails in the next few hours.
Please do reply if this happened to you.