EB2 Predictions (Rather Calculations) - 2012

[Spectator]

Spec, excellent summary. I am playing devil's advocate here or angel's depending on the way you look at it.

We all agree that cut off dates would be somewhere in late Q1, early Q2 of 2008. But for this to happen the USCIS processing has to be faster than the visas are made available. This would trigger retrogression and the said cut-off date. But so far USCIS has been playing catch up as far as processing goes, and to its credit has done better than the paltry expectations that many had. It might just unfold that USCIS processes just enough cases, and Mr. CO does not have to trigger retrogression. Without retrogression, Mr. CO can use the following (http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/Immi...ion%20of.pdf):

enabling him to use QSP every quarter that does not see retrogression. The bad thing about retrogression is that he has to follow country quotas and that is bad for first 3 quarters of the fiscal year. Without retrogression, he can gently guide the cut off dates forward as a portion of the inventory gets adjudicated.

For their part EB2IC folks have to be patient with USCIS and not flood them with SRs once the processing starts taking more than 4 months.

kd,

Actually, the more I read my post, the worse it appears to convey my thoughts.

As I am sure Teddy and Q would agree, getting to an end point is as much "gut feel" as anything, based on multiple factors. It then becomes difficult to justify it easily in any written form. It's a bit frustrating really, which is why I rarely post on the subject.

As for USCIS processing speed, I would disagree. In February, they have managed to approve far more EB2-I cases than any QSP could provide. Even being conservative, EB2-I alone received 4.5k approvals - then add EB2-C on to that. That level of approvals is not sustainable. In fact, it is not inconceivable DOS/USCIS may have blown the February allotment and used some of the March numbers. The law only talks about quarterly numbers, so that is not an issue. It may be that the numbers are "ahead of the curve" and some throttling back is required.

The dates must retrogress at some point to a date that can handle the number of visas available for FY2012. I agree that when that becomes necessary is a point for debate and differing opinions.

I don't think USCIS have the capability to throttle approvals with the level of finesse required. If the dates don't retrogress, then USCIS might just pick the low hanging fruit from ever later cases to meet the numbers.

In that sense, retrogression is a good thing, because it will force USCIS to adjudicate cases they feel are complicated, or don't generate a quick adjudication towards the ISOs targets. The sooner the better, once it is deemed necessary, so that the maximum time is available to adjudicate those cases. It will act as a focus for USCIS. If it doesn't happen, then people with earlier PDs are going to be left waiting, while later PDs are approved.

Even if the dates do retrogress, all approvals are still being made under the spillover laws, so I didn't quite understand your comment. It merely limits the timespan of PDs that USCIS has to choose from.

[qesehmk]

KD .... your definition of QSP is right. So we don't need to discuss that. The question is when do you take the call that QSP may be required?

Given that there was large EB2IC and EB2ROW backlog at teh start of the year, the point when demand fell short of supply wouldn't have arrived until at least December. But we saw movement from day 1. That's why I am saying this is different that usual QSP.

You need to think how this is going to play out. Think this way - Oct 1 2011 - what will CO do on this day? How about Oct 9th when he is close to publishing dates for Nov?

If there were going to be QSP then CO wouldn't know that until mid of Dec. The question is when do you take the call that this quarter I may let some numbers go unused? Because there was enough EB2IC and EB1 and EB2ROW backlog when 2012 FY started, CO could've simply used that backlog until he truly couldnt find qualified demand to meet the supply. But the fact us he didn't wait.

That's all i am referring to. Does this make sense?

Q, please allow me to explain once again. I think we have been through this a few times. The kind of QSP you described will happen only if the demand is known and is more than the quarterly quota - typically happens after retrogression. When Mr. CO sees the demand less than the quarterly quota, he allows visas to be granted with out regard to country quota, as long as the total visa allocation stays under quarterly quota - this is the new QSP. For this he may choose any date movement he think he needs to make it happen. So I disagree with your point about only Dec should see movement/approvals in case of QSP. More over, the date movement was to generate inventory only as clearly explained by Mr. CO. About your point that the date movement is larger than required is based on the assumption that USCIS will approve all cases in inventory and move in an orderly fashion. I am sure USCIS and Mr. CO have their statistics about how many cases to accept esp. as they know cases do not get approved in order nor all cases are approved within, say, 4 months. So they are hedging their bets to have max. number of approvable cases in the allotted time frame. Nothing wrong with that as they have no real idea about how the recession and the demand destruction - small as it might be eventually - may affect the filing rate.

I do not think we are entirely focused on what he will do next, but more on how may all of this play out. On the face of it, retrogression seems a possibility. But I presented the scenario where it may not happen. Unlikely, I know, but so was the inventory build up.

[vizcard]

Q - I'm going on a stream of consciousness here. I'm trying to get into COs head now.

************
Oct 2011 What do I really KNOW.
1. SOFAD will happen. Unsure how much. Historically around 30k.
2. USCIS takes approx 4 months to approve cases
3. The Backlog at the start of Oct is less than expected SOFAD.
4. Some historic approval % for 485s.
5. Potentially # of approved 140s.
6. He cannot waste visas

What don't i know -
1. Volume of applications expected coming in
2. % of DD.

Dammit. I dont have enough HARD FACTS to not move dates. If I follow the standard process of waiting for the summer to move CODs, then there's a high probability I would waste visas due to USCIS processing times. So maybe i need to figure out demand sooner. Hence the use of QSP and that too split on a monthly basis.

Nov 2011
I can wait till end of Dec BUT I still want the USCIS to keep cranking away. Those guys are pretty lazy anyway (ha ha). so I'm going to move it a few months and see what happens.

Dec 2011
Holy crap. Not enough applications have come in...move some more...heck move a lot more.

Jan 2012
The dumbasses from 2008 aren't applying fast enough. I still don't know enough. Let's move a big number in the Feb VB. maybe all 2008 will come in by then and the 2009 crowd will have better sense and apply earlier in the month.

Feb 2012
Phew. I finally feel somewhat comfortable but just to be really really comfortable, let me move it another few months. The economy was horrible in 2008/2009, so maybe the demand won't be as much.

************
How's that with some dramatization ?

[nishant2200]

Not a problem. Mention in EVL, all the positions held with time periods. Then explain current position with job duties n salary.

My PERM was filed in late 2010 for the position "Project Manager" even though I was Senior Developer.
(My employer used to file EB2 only for Manager and above. Since I was expecting a promotion in 2011 they filed EB2 projecting as Manager)

In 2011, when I got the promotion, I got the title of "Technical Manager". The job duties are same but title is different. So technically I was NEVER a "Project Manager".

Would that be a problem?

[aGCHopefull]

Thanks Viz, Q, Nishant and all for your kind help.

[Jonty Rhodes]

Don't know if this data will be helpful or not but posting it for Gurus and experts to take a peek. Remove the post if the links are not useful.

Application for Immigration Benefits

http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Resources...s-2012-jan.pdf

I-485 applications at field offices (exclude EB-485 at NSC and TSC)

http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Resources...a_2011-dec.pdf

[eb2visa]

The original AC21-Portability Memo from USCIS

http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memo...ntrm122705.pdf

I have one question:

If we want to port from one employer to another employer, even though we have the EAD, we should have approved/pending h1b and the new employer should file for an H1B and then send the letter to USCIS about porting. is this correct?

Any one could you please explain how the porting works beyond 6 years in layman terms. Thanks in advance

[goforgreen]

... the dates can continue to stay at an irrational place more than our ability to speculate when they will retrogress

Q, Nice take on Buffets' quote :-) - The markets can stay irrational longer than you can remain solvent.

Excuse me if it was unintentional/coincidence.

[eb2visa]

Seems to be there is a good chart on AC21
http://ac21portability.com/scenarios.pdf

The original AC21-Portability Memo from USCIS

http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memo...ntrm122705.pdf

I have one question:

If we want to port from one employer to another employer, even though we have the EAD, we should have approved/pending h1b and the new employer should file for an H1B and then send the letter to USCIS about porting. is this correct?

Any one could you please explain how the porting works beyond 6 years in layman terms. Thanks in advance

[qesehmk]

Isn't it!!

p.s. - But as far as the original author - i didn't know it was Buffett!

Q, Nice take on Buffets' quote :-) - The markets can stay irrational longer than you can remain solvent.

Excuse me if it was unintentional/coincidence.

[nostwal]

I dont see anyone. what is the username?

one more Jan filler got approval.....


http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussi...page/last_page

[mrdeeds]

Q - I'm going on a stream of consciousness here. I'm trying to get into COs head now.

************
Oct 2011 What do I really KNOW.
1. SOFAD will happen. Unsure how much. Historically around 30k.
2. USCIS takes approx 4 months to approve cases
3. The Backlog at the start of Oct is less than expected SOFAD.
4. Some historic approval % for 485s.
5. Potentially # of approved 140s.
6. He cannot waste visas

What don't i know -
1. Volume of applications expected coming in
2. % of DD.

Dammit. I dont have enough HARD FACTS to not move dates. If I follow the standard process of waiting for the summer to move CODs, then there's a high probability I would waste visas due to USCIS processing times. So maybe i need to figure out demand sooner. Hence the use of QSP and that too split on a monthly basis.

Nov 2011
I can wait till end of Dec BUT I still want the USCIS to keep cranking away. Those guys are pretty lazy anyway (ha ha). so I'm going to move it a few months and see what happens.

Dec 2011
Holy crap. Not enough applications have come in...move some more...heck move a lot more.

Jan 2012
The dumbasses from 2008 aren't applying fast enough. I still don't know enough. Let's move a big number in the Feb VB. maybe all 2008 will come in by then and the 2009 crowd will have better sense and apply earlier in the month.

Feb 2012
Phew. I finally feel somewhat comfortable but just to be really really comfortable, let me move it another few months. The economy was horrible in 2008/2009, so maybe the demand won't be as much.

************
How's that with some dramatization ?

Vizcard, this is pretty good. Mind stepping into CO's shoes once again and thinking why he is issuing NVC notices going into 2011?

[qesehmk]

Viz

The oscar for dramatization goes to Viz (and CO in absentia)! What you are saying is essentially he moved it in anticipation (in other words without regards to actual demand supply at a point in time). Which is what I am saying.

Q - I'm going on a stream of consciousness here. I'm trying to get into COs head now.

************
Oct 2011 What do I really KNOW.
1. SOFAD will happen. Unsure how much. Historically around 30k.
2. USCIS takes approx 4 months to approve cases
3. The Backlog at the start of Oct is less than expected SOFAD.
4. Some historic approval % for 485s.
5. Potentially # of approved 140s.
6. He cannot waste visas

What don't i know -
1. Volume of applications expected coming in
2. % of DD.

Dammit. I dont have enough HARD FACTS to not move dates. If I follow the standard process of waiting for the summer to move CODs, then there's a high probability I would waste visas due to USCIS processing times. So maybe i need to figure out demand sooner. Hence the use of QSP and that too split on a monthly basis.

Nov 2011
I can wait till end of Dec BUT I still want the USCIS to keep cranking away. Those guys are pretty lazy anyway (ha ha). so I'm going to move it a few months and see what happens.

Dec 2011
Holy crap. Not enough applications have come in...move some more...heck move a lot more.

Jan 2012
The dumbasses from 2008 aren't applying fast enough. I still don't know enough. Let's move a big number in the Feb VB. maybe all 2008 will come in by then and the 2009 crowd will have better sense and apply earlier in the month.

Feb 2012
Phew. I finally feel somewhat comfortable but just to be really really comfortable, let me move it another few months. The economy was horrible in 2008/2009, so maybe the demand won't be as much.

************
How's that with some dramatization ?

[goforgreen]

Isn't it!!

p.s. - But as far as the original author - i didn't know it was Buffett!

I googled and it is not Buffet. This was said by John Keynes of Keynasian Economics fame.

[qesehmk]

Thanks. That quote was actually unlike Buffett since he likes to be (and has the power to) stay through irrational markets while focusing on fundamentals (and arbitrages that mortals like us never see).

I googled and it is not Buffet. This was said by John Keynes of Keynasian Economics fame.

[vizcard]

Vizcard, this is pretty good. Mind stepping into CO's shoes once again and thinking why he is issuing NVC notices going into 2011?

Just as Q has postulated... he is doing it in anticipation of demand. Going in to mid-2011 in the next 12 months is not unreasonable especially if we get 30-35K of SOFAD this year.

[mrdeeds]

Just as Q has postulated... he is doing it in anticipation of demand. Going in to mid-2011 in the next 12 months is not unreasonable especially if we get 30-35K of SOFAD this year.

Thanks Viz. However, what I am reading people say is that the resting point expected is Q1 2008 in FY12. That leaves atleast half of 2008 and 2009 and 2010 to get to 2011. I think Q1 2008 takes the SOFAD you quoted into account. For DOS to be issuing notices into mid-2011 with the belief that those dates will be current in the next 12 months or so is pretty optimistic, don't you think? Even if we get similar SOFAD into FY13, do you think we will clear 2.5 years of apps in next 12 months or even 18 months if we take FY13 into account?

My point here is more of a conundrum. Unless CO is just shooting blind, he must see some data that makes him think that 2011 may be current in the next year..but the collective analysis here says that's just not reasonable. So what's the basis for his anticipation??

Further, if the resting point is indeed Q1 - mid 2008, it will be a 2007 like scenario whereby he would not need to move dates for a couple of years...unless there is a big DD..which we seem to not believe in a lot after the recent data.

[kd2008]

Thanks Viz. However, what I am reading people say is that the resting point expected is Q1 2008 in FY12. That leaves atleast half of 2008 and 2009 and 2010 to get to 2011. I think Q1 2008 takes the SOFAD you quoted into account. For DOS to be issuing notices into mid-2011 with the belief that those dates will be current in the next 12 months or so is pretty optimistic, don't you think? Even if we get similar SOFAD into FY13, do you think we will clear 2.5 years of apps in next 12 months or even 18 months if we take FY13 into account?

My point here is more of a conundrum. Unless CO is just shooting blind, he must see some data that makes him think that 2011 may be current in the next year..but the collective analysis here says that's just not reasonable. So what's the basis for his anticipation??

Further, if the resting point is indeed Q1 - mid 2008, it will be a 2007 like scenario whereby he would not need to move dates for a couple of years...unless there is a big DD..which we seem to not believe in a lot after the recent data.

Please try to understand that the date movement and the approvals are coupled only following a retrogression, and not during inventory build up. The mid 2008 date is for if and when a retrogression happens. As seen from the NVC notices upto June 2011, retrogression may not be the plan, or not needed depending on USCIS speed of processing. Retrogression is needed only if USCIS asks for more visas than available and not because it is sitting on a large pile of applications. Remember, even after July-2007 fiasco, the dates moved to Aug 2006 in Aug 2008 as there were not enough approvable cases because most were stuck in FBI checks. If you look at EB2ROW approvals on trackitt they are all over the place even for cases that were filed in the same month. Somewhat similar trend is expected for EB2IC in future.

[Mavrick]

Remember, even after July-2007 fiasco, the dates moved to Aug 2006 in Aug 2008 as there were not enough approvable cases because most were stuck in FBI checks.

If the above statement is true, I'm positive that there will be slow movement for next few months until everything gets sorted out. Meanwhile, USCIS might give GC's to applicants whose cases are crystal clear or so called low hanging fruit.

[Spectator]

Remember, even after July-2007 fiasco, the dates moved to Aug 2006 in Aug 2008 as there were not enough approvable cases because most were stuck in FBI checks.

If the above statement is true, I'm positive that there will be slow movement for next few months until everything gets sorted out. Meanwhile, USCIS might give GC's to applicants whose cases are crystal clear or so called low hanging fruit.

That is an interesting observation and is probably why USCIS started pre-adjudicationg cases from September 2008 onwards.

Generally, the FBI problems have been resolved.

In September 2008, USCIS only reported 14.8k pre-adjudicated cases (I don't know in which categories).

The number rose steeply from then particularly from February 2009, reaching a maximum of 185.7k in September 2009.

Coincidentally ??, the first (rather inaccurate) USCIS Inventory was published in August 2009.

The pre adjudicated numbers stayed at around 180k until April 2010 and have fallen steadily since that date, with the exception of January 2011, when cases pre-adjudicated at Local Office were returned to TSC.

With the implementation of pre-adjudication, it is much more difficult for an August 2008 to reoccur.

A picture is worth a thousand words, they say:
I-485 Trends at Service Centres_1.jpg

[kd2008]

That is an interesting observation and is probably why USCIS started pre-adjudicationg cases from September 2008 onwards.

Generally, the FBI problems have been resolved.

In September 2008, USCIS only reported 14.8k pre-adjudicated cases (I don't know in which categories).

The number rose steeply from then particularly from February 2009, reaching a maximum of 185.7k in September 2009.

Coincidentally ??, the first (rather inaccurate) USCIS Inventory was published in August 2009.

The pre adjudicated numbers stayed at around 180k until April 2010 and have fallen steadily since that date, with the exception of January 2011, when cases pre-adjudicated at Local Office were returned to TSC.

With the implementation of pre-adjudication, it is much more difficult for an August 2008 to reoccur.

A picture is worth a thousand words, they say:
I-485 Trends at Service Centres_1.jpg

Spec, do you think that this pre-adjudication and clearing up of FBI checks forced Mr. CO retrogress dates as the demand started showing faster than available visa in later 2008? Absent that USCIS processing may have been hapzard but without retrogression.

I remember this post from last year, where you explained why dates won't go current:

http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showth...=3824#post3824

As cases are adjudicated, a visa is immediately issued right now. If USCIS does not have additional resources - which I think is the case now, then I wonder would there be retrogression at all as a pile of cases won't just accumulate. Mr. CO may stall dates at best?

We have already seen that having a pile of cases in inventory means nothing to Mr. CO. As long as he thinks there are enough to use up annual quota. He has merrily added way more cases than 1 year need of inventory. What do you think?

[Kanmani]

Due to extensive backlog in FBI name check, there was a USCIS policy change happened during Feb 2008 , USCIS started approving cases including I-485's without FBI name check clearance, as long as I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days .

http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...aq-20feb08.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/usc...004718190aRCRD

USCIS is currently approving cases with FBI finger printing check + IBIS check cleared. FBI will be doing name check in their own pace . If they find any hit in the name check they will revoke GC and physically remove the beneficiary.

[kd2008]

USCIS is currently approving cases with FBI finger printing check + IBIS check cleared. FBI will be doing name check in their own pace . If they find any hit in the name check they will revoke GC and physically remove the beneficiary.

Kanmani, according to this document,

http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...ecks_42506.pdf

The FBI name check is totally different from the FBI fingerprint check. The records maintained in the FBI name check process consist of administrative, applicant, criminal, personnel and other files compiled by law enforcement. Initial responses to this check generally take about two weeks. In about 80 percent of the cases, no match is found. Of the remaining 20 percent, most are resolved within six months. Less than one percent of cases subject to an FBI name check remain pending longer than six months.

So I think FBI name checks are done before approval in 99% of cases.

[Spectator]

Spec, do you think that this pre-adjudication and clearing up of FBI checks forced Mr. CO retrogress dates as the demand started showing faster than available visa in later 2008? Absent that USCIS processing may have been hapzard but without retrogression.

I remember this post from last year, where you explained why dates won't go current:

http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showth...=3824#post3824

As cases are adjudicated, a visa is immediately issued right now. If USCIS does not have additional resources - which I think is the case now, then I wonder would there be retrogression at all as a pile of cases won't just accumulate. Mr. CO may stall dates at best?

We have already seen that having a pile of cases in inventory means nothing to Mr. CO. As long as he thinks there are enough to use up annual quota. He has merrily added way more cases than 1 year need of inventory. What do you think?

kd,

Here's the scenario I think happened in 2008.

The end of the FY was rapidly approaching and, without pre-adjudicated cases to show in the DOS Demand Data, CO got very worried about USCIS adjudicating enough cases to use up the available visas.

So he pushed the dates forward from 01APR04 to 01JUN06 in August 2008 and then 01AUG06 in September 2008 to ensure there were enough "low hanging fruit" that USCIS could adjudicate enough cases in time.

With the beginning of the new FY in October 2008, the dates were retrogressed to 01APR04 again as there was no longer the pressure of wasting visas. Without that factor, the dates would not have advanced. In addition, there was no quarterly spillover, so there were not that many monthly visas available from October 2008.

Possibly as a result of that and following some heated discussions, USCIS were forced to start or accelerate the pre-adjudication program.

Once a case is pre-adjudicated and the visa request has been made as part of the process, the demand becomes visible to DOS. Since a pre-adjudicated case can be fairly quickly approved when the PD becomes Current, that gave CO the visibility into the numbers likely from USCIS in the future for a given movement in the Cut Off Dates. I don't think it was a coincidence that this exercise was completed in time for the end of the next FY.

At the moment, CO is essentially "flying blind", since he no longer has any visibility into the demand from USCIS. He is not taking any chances on there being an insufficient number of cases that can be adjudicated.

Retrogression depends on whether USCIS processing can outstrip the supply of visas for a given period. There are statutory limits on the Quarter.

If USCIS continue to process cases at the pace they did in February, they will easily surpass the numbers available. Even by the most optimistic projections, there are not another 35k visas available to EB2-IC in the remaining 7 months - I think USCIS approved at least 5k in February. That's on the conservative basis of 410 Trackitt approvals @ 10% equating to c. 4k EB2-I approvals and EB2-C accounting for a further 1k. I suspect the number is a bit higher.

Any number of cases in the Inventory means very little to CO. He is interested in the number that translate to visa usage before the end of the FY. USCIS has a long and undistinguished history in slow processing and he doesn't fully trust them. He won't act until he sees results, which means the Demand appearing. To be fair to USCIS, they have processed cases remarkably quickly and could not have started approving them any earlier than they have done.

That is what he did with F2A, even when most of the cases were with DOS themselves.

As I mentioned before, I think USCIS is trying to send CO a message about their ability to process sufficient cases. Whether that is heard, or acted upon is another matter.

I may be way off base, but that is how I see the present situation. If I had to guess, I think he might stall the dates this time to give filers some extra time. If they move forward, he is even more conservative than I am! Maybe he doesn't want to repeat this scenario too often.

[Kanmani]

Kanmani, according to this document,

http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...ecks_42506.pdf

So I think FBI name checks are done before approval in 99% of cases.

Kd, this document dated April 2006 is prior to the policy change .