EB2-3 Predictions (Rather Calculations) - 2013

[Spectator]

Something seems off!!

For one, April 6, 2013 is a Saturday. As far as I know (I went back and checked as much as I could on Google) all of Charles' other meetings with AILA or other groups have been on weekdays (correct me if I'm wrong please). Typically when he meets with a group, all of them post on their website ASAP. This is the best way for most attorneys to generate traffic and thereby business, so it's very unlikely for them to sit on this for a week and not say anything, ESPECIALLY info like this. Since this April 6th meeting is not showing up on any other source, that would then mean that Charles met with someone from Ware|Gasparian on a Saturday and gave them some potentially HUGE news that he didn't give anyone else.

I'm not saying that it's not possible, it just seems VERY odd!!

Still_Waiting,

I'll admit that my first thought was that CO does not seem to be in the habit of meeting with individual law firms and that no other law firm was reporting this. I hadn't checked the date.

Nonetheless, the same opinion from this firm has now been given to two of our members.

It would be highly unethical for a law firm to lie about this. It would have been just as easy to say that the meeting did not, in the end, take place.

But it is only an interpretation of what what CO may have said - we do not know the exact words used, or whether CO said anything further as to why this might be a possibility.

Take the response as a sincere reply, but subject to possible misinterpretation or over interpretation.

I would urge people not to go overboard about it. Let's see if further confirmations are forthcoming.

[sbhagwat2000]

Spec,

I agree we shoould be waiting for more info. What do you think on the calculation above though? Do you see it happening where EB1 and 2 WW basically suck the extra visas. do you see EB2 WW using 45000?

[venkat]

I feel the first real sign would be coming from consular Green Card cases. Lets hope that someone with a late 2007 or early 2008 priority date gets communication from NVC for an immigrant visa appointment in India.

Typically appointments are given about 40-45 days ahead of time. We should know around late May or early June.

Note:- I think this helped us a lot during late 2011 when cutoff dates were getting advanced left and right. NVC fee receipt dates were dictating how fast dates would move ahead.

[Vkkpnm]

Spec/Matt,

What do you think on the calculation done by sbhagwat2000?

Thanks

[geeaarpee]

I cannot get this out of my head - did some quick calculations -

Lets say

EB1 - 41000 - this has happened in the past
EB2 WW - 45000 - in the realm of possiblility since EB2 WW has already exhausted 25000 visas

EB1 has - 5000 + 1135 from EB4 -extra = 6135 - > no extra visas from EB5

6135 - 6000 = 135.

I think this is what is happening and hence no movement in eb2i

Are you kidding me? The only way it is possible, if EB3-WW is current (means everyone has ported).

[MATT2012]

I did sleep through the attorneys comment. As Spec pointed out, why should an Attorney lie, that too in a written communication.
Being said that, I dont think the meeting was an AILA meeting. So CO was not giving a formal guidance. It is possibly a one off question, and a so generic answer to avoid further questions. That is my conclusion.As we dont know, how the question was framed or its circumstances, there is no point further analysing the comment. For the time being I will leave the topic, until we get further guidance.

Thanks Spectator and Matt. I was able to get some additional information. Very discouraging and disappointing, if indeed accurate. See full email chain below:

-----------------------------------------------------------------

From: David Ware <dware@david-ware.com>
Date: Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 4:39 PM
Subject: RE: [General inquiries] Outcome of meeting with Charles Oppenheim
To: <---@gmail.com>


Just a few weeks by end of FY.

David Ware
Attorney at law
Ware|Gasparian
3850 N. Causeway Blvd., Suite 555
Metairie Louisiana 70002-1752
Phone: (504) 830 5900/(800) 537 0179
Fax: (504) 830 5909
Other Locations: Baton Rouge. Jackson. Pensacola. Birmingham. Seattle
To visit our website, click on the logo below.
If you wish to make an appointment: Please call Yolanda Mata at the numbers above.




From: [---@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2013 4:39 PM
To: David Ware
Subject: Re: [General inquiries] Outcome of meeting with Charles Oppenheim

Thanks for your reply. Was there any guidance or approximate date range provided around where India EB2 might advance to over the next few months or till the end of this fiscal year?

Appreciate your response.

---


On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 2:00 PM, David Ware <dware@david-ware.com> wrote:
Yes, india EB 2 will advance a bit, not much by July or August.

David Ware
Attorney at law
Ware|Gasparian
3850 N. Causeway Blvd., Suite 555
Metairie Louisiana 70002-1752
Phone: (504) 830 5900/(800) 537 0179
Fax: (504) 830 5909
Other Locations: Baton Rouge. Jackson. Pensacola. Birmingham. Seattle
To visit our website, click on the logo below.
If you wish to make an appointment: Please call Yolanda Mata at the numbers above.





-----Original Message-----
From: info@david-ware.com [mailto:info@david-ware.com] On Behalf Of ---@gmail.com
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 2:01 PM
To: David Ware
Subject: [General inquiries] Outcome of meeting with Charles Oppenheim

--- sent a message using the contact form at http://david-ware.com/contact.

Hi,

You have an article on your website that states that you were going to have a meeting with Charles Oppenheim on April 6 to get projections for EB2 India and China. Below is the link to the article. Were you able to meet with Mr.
Oppenheim and would you be able to share the outcome of that meeting?

http://david-ware.com/immigration-in...eb-2-and-india

Thanks.

[vizcard]

Are you kidding me? The only way it is possible, if EB3-WW is current (means everyone has ported).

I agree. Considering EB3WW demand is 3850 from the last demand data, it would imply everyone ported over to get to 45K. Not impossible considering people might be concerned about CIR (benefit for India - bad for everyone else) - but unlikely.

There are 3 ways that could result in the language of this email. In ranking of probabiity (high to low) according to me -
1. CO has some data thats positive but doesn't want to raise hopes.
2. CO doesn't have the info and hedged
3. There's some major crap going on behind the scenes that's not evident from the data published.

[MATT2012]

I would like to see numerical/circumstantial evidence to come to any conclusion.

But coming to his calculation, he has point that EB1 has used more visas in the past, but that was before Karzarian. I am not saying it cannot happen again. Any normal logic will suggest to spillovers even before, FB SO came in.

I partly agree on EB5, it is a possible scenario given the increase in applications.

EB2 WW- There is no evidence that it is headed over 42K, this is taking into consideration around 25K already consumed.

Spec/Matt,

What do you think on the calculation done by sbhagwat2000?

Thanks

[MATT2012]

I was planning to put out the below later this week in trackitt, given all the discussions we had due to Attorney email, I am putting it out here..

Just a consolidation of my thoughts on EB priority date movement for rest of this fiscal. The below do not take into consideration any legislative changes.
EB1 Trends
The general expectation for EB1 is it will give more spill overs than last fiscal. As many of you know, EB1 used majority of its own initial quota last fiscal. EB1 had very less usage the previous fiscal (2010-2011). It was due to uncertainty/changes created by Kazarian case.
What should be the general expectation? EB1 should yield between 2K – 6K. Tackitt trends are one of the early indicators of EB1 consumption. As there are very minor representations of anybody other than EB1- India, it is hard to make a conclusion. There are some reductions in EB-1C Indian cases in trackitt. Can this be considered as across the board, may be? The only official indication is from Feb AILA meeting, where the Controller is quoted as saying “Possible good news is the possibility of certain “fall down” from EB-1 (numbers are not known at this point) to allow for more numbers to be used for EB-2 India.” Quoted from CILAW group.
To conclude a spillover expectation of 3-4 K spillover is realistic.
EB2 Trends
EB2 WW consumed 33k in fiscal year 2010-2011 and roughly 25k in fiscal year 2011-2012. Keep in mind that fiscal year 2011-2012 had only 9 months as visas were ‘U’ or unavailable for 3 months. If they have been available, the consumption may have been close equivalent to the previous fiscal. So there is between 6 – 8K visa demand pending from last fiscal, which was carried forward to this fiscal. So if the normal demand of this fiscal stays same as last year, we should expect a demand between 39K and 41K. Trackitt trends for first six months for EB2-WW are equivalent to the annual demand from last fiscal which is 25K. Going by that thought, as we have roughly six months left EB2-WW may consume upto 41K. As there was some uncertainty last fiscal for the EB2-WW community due to retrogression, there may be more representation in trackitt. But an expectation of around 38-39K will be realistic.
The other early indicator is labor approval trends. It is very much pointing towards 37- 38K consumption this fiscal. The conclusion is majority of its own spillover will be consumed by EB2-WW, 4K will be a safe assumption.
EB2 China will use its own quota this fiscal year and the indications are it will move without any dependency to EB2- India and will end up around October, 2008(+/-).
EB3Trends
The current movement will help avoid wastage of visas from this category. With the next VB movement it will be more than sufficient for this fiscal. In order to build demand for next fiscal the controller may decide to move more aggressively into mid to late 2008 which may possibly lead to retrogression during next fiscal which starts in October. Will need one more Visa Bulletin to confirm the direction.
EB3-I should end up around Feb, 2003(+/-) by end of this fiscal.
EB4 Trends
There is no early lead/guidance available for this category. For projection purposes, one can only look into past usages. In the middle of last fiscal there were some warnings about excessive EB4 usage, but eventually it gave SO of roughly 2.5 K. The expectation is that SO will be very similar or slightly more. There is no certainty in this category as there were fiscal years the quota completely consumed. I-360 which is the early indicator takes generally 5 months to process, many applications takes more than that (6-8 months) and from my understanding it cannot be concurrently filed with I-485. The number of pending cases of I-360 has increased and number of completed cases has reduced. Unless USICS gears up, the spillover of around 2.5 – 3K is moderate.
EB5 Trends
EB5 always have yielded SO in the last many fiscal years. The amount of SO have reduced in the last two fiscals due to increased demand. As per Visa office, they thought of establishing a cutoff for China, which they later backed off. At this point expecting spillover of anything more than couple of 100’s is not logical. One should assume EB5 may probably use its entire quota. I-526 which is the early indicator, have a lot pending applications. There is a shift of application processing of I-526 from CA to Washington, which may increase the processing times temporally. But going forward it is a big question mark!! The below is the quote from Washington Post.
“State Department officials said they are on track to issue a record number of visas this year — more than 9,000, close to the annual limit of 10,000 mandated by Congress”
Porting
There are no conclusive methods to calculate porting, one can either compare USICS inventory or DoS demand data. Both will give totally different figures for porting. There is a general thought process that porting consumed roughly 2500-3000 visas last year. If porting has consumed 2750 in 8 months, it should naturally be 5500 in this fiscal. Considering another 20% increase it should be around 6600. Out of the 6600, 1500 has already consumed visas, so an upcoming demand of 5100.
Another method is based on assumed consumption, If you assume that 250 visas are issued every month in the current fiscal for priority dates 2003 and 2004 and leaves 425 as demand, the calculation will be little different. 250 x 6(representing six complete months of consumption) = 1500. 1500 + 425 demand = 1925 being demand for 10 months, so for fiscal till Sep 30, 2013 it will be = 1925/10 * 16 = 3080. So for each calendar year there may be a demand of roughly 1550. So total 4.5 fiscal years until July 2007. 1550x 4.5 = 6975. Considering 1500 visas issued, the upcoming demand may be 6975 – 1500 = 5475.
The first figure makes an assumption of 20% increase which assumes a big part of labor approval increases are due to porting. The second figure assumes 250 visas are issued per month. Either one may not completely hold true. Porting demand between 5100 and 5500 should not come as a total surprise. Only time will prove, whether we were totally wrong in this assumption, or we got it somewhat correct. As I wasn’t fully sure about the above two approaches, for my calculation purposes I derived a figure of 4500 based on my calculations on demand data movement.
Conclusion
Based on what I discussed above, it should take the priority date to March/April 2008. Though I wouldn’t be surprised seeing a movement further than that. Regarding when the dates will move, my thought process is, it will be at least two steps, not sure when!!
Before I conclude, I would like to thank many senior members in different forums including trackitt and Q’s forum, who put out their logical thought process in writing for benefit of others. I learned most of the above from many of them. As an additional thank you, if I don’t thank Spec from Q forum, it will not be fair. He always had clear statistical backups for any discussion I had with him.
Let me conclude by saying many data elements discussed above, assumes the demand will be based on historic trends. As there are various factors involved, including demand, processing speed, timing of the visa date movement etc., it is extremely difficult to conclude one way or other. Each one of us should conclude based on one’s own thought process. Ultimately we all need “Almighty God’s Blessing” or as some may call it ‘LUCK’, for success in every aspect of our lives including immigration.

[gc_soon]

Thanks Matt.
Few weeks end of FY is as good as no movement at all. Movement in weeks is normally mentioned only for EB3. Few weeks movement may consume in low hundreds at most. A low hundreds figure
would mean literally no SO. If CO is expecting no SO, he could have said no movement.
Is there a possibility CO or lawyer confused EB3 with EB2?

[vizcard]

Matt
That seems inline with what Spec and Q have been saying. Ofcourse this new email throws question in to some of the assumptions. Porting by far is the biggest unknown. Another 5500 just seems high based on gut feeling but i can't argue with the calculations you have. I tend to agree more with your 4500 number but splitting the difference even if we go with 5000, the dates should move close to June than April 2008.

The other variable is processing times. If the jumps happen in the Aug and Sep VB, not everyone porting (2004-2007) will have their cases done this year. So while the gross number might be around 5000, the net might be slightly lower. I'm not counting on that but that could factor in.

[sbhagwat2000]

Thanks Matt for the great work here. I wish what you are saying were true. I think we should all just accept the fact that there will be no SO. It seems theres something thats unknown to us that we are not taking into consideration. Lawyers who reply like this will speak the truth and will always have the correct info. By May it will be clear what we have missed

[MATT2012]

If USICS reduces their processing time for EB2-WW and EB1, it will consume more visas there by reducing SO. That is all that I can think of now. But to conclude, I would like to see some indicators in some forum..
or As you said there may be a new Unknown factor this fiscal.

Thanks Matt for the great work here. I wish what you are saying were true. I think we should all just accept the fact that there will be no SO. It seems theres something thats unknown to us that we are not taking into consideration. Lawyers who reply like this will speak the truth and will always have the correct info. By May it will be clear what we have missed

[SmileBaba]

Is there a possibility CO or lawyer confused EB3 with EB2?

That's what rang my mind too! I think Lawyer firm got confused between EB3 and EB2.

Matt: Thanks much for the time and effort you put into coming up with a detailed analysis.

[bvsamrat]

The following scenerio might hold good for all statements

a) July movement - only for few weeks
b) August all the spill over applied to move to June/July2008- depending on SO and demand only. No porters are counted
c) September back to retrogression to March/April 2005 due to porter rush of applications
d) Same will continue next year.

All lucky would get GC before porters kick in- Hence opening window would be only a Month=IMHO

Thanks Matt for the great work here. I wish what you are saying were true. I think we should all just accept the fact that there will be no SO. It seems theres something thats unknown to us that we are not taking into consideration. Lawyers who reply like this will speak the truth and will always have the correct info. By May it will be clear what we have missed

[Spectator]

Matt,

That truly is an excellent summary above.

It explains both why the conclusions have been reached and where the uncertainties lie.

If our exchanges have helped, that all good - I have benefited equally. Your praise is very generous, but unwarranted.

Ultimately, it's all a collaborative effort, but you should take full credit for this piece of work. I'll repeat it again - this really is an excellent summary.

[Niksammy]

The following scenerio might hold good for all statements

a) July movement - only for few weeks
b) August all the spill over applied to move to June/July2008- depending on SO and demand only. No porters are counted
c) September back to retrogression to March/April 2005 due to porter rush of applications
d) Same will continue next year.

All lucky would get GC before porters kick in- Hence opening window would be only a Month=IMHO

Gurus,

Isn't all the Eb2-I demand from Sept 2004 till mid-2007 primarily people porting from EB3 to EB2 ? So if EB2-I dates move in two steps (say first by few weeks in July 2013 and then to early-2008 in Aug 2013) or in one giant step to late-2007 (in July 2013), USCIS will STILL primarily be processing porting applications. Is that a correct statement?

[Spectator]

The following scenerio might hold good for all statements

a) July movement - only for few weeks
b) August all the spill over applied to move to June/July2008- depending on SO and demand only. No porters are counted
c) September back to retrogression to March/April 2005 due to porter rush of applications
d) Same will continue next year.

All lucky would get GC before porters kick in- Hence opening window would be only a Month=IMHO

Gurus,

Isn't all the Eb2-I demand from Sept 2004 till mid-2007 primarily people porting from EB3 to EB2 ? So if EB2-I dates move in two steps (say first by few weeks in July 2013 and then to early-2008 in Aug 2013) or in one giant step to late-2007 (in July 2013), USCIS will STILL primarily be processing porting applications. Is that a correct statement?

Niksammy,

There is still some uncertainty as to how quickly a queued up porting case might be processed by USCIS and whether they might get RFEs. I think bvsamrat assumes it will take some time.

Another valid scenario (discussed previously) based on what is basically a 2 step movement would be

a) July VB - little movement.
b) August VB - movement to the end of 2006 or end of 2007 depending on numbers.
c) September VB - movement to final date.
d) Internally retrogress in September when visa numbers are exhausted (usually about 2 weeks before the end of the FY).

The advantage is that, in general it preserves approval in PD order and ensures that if insufficient porting cases are approved in August (CO has to set the September VB in early August) that there are sufficient numbers of "ordinary" pre-adjudicated EB2 cases that can be quickly approved to use up available numbers.

Again, the disadvantage for many is that later PDs will be Current for only one month and it will again be a lottery as to who gets approved and who doesn't before visa numbers are exhausted for the FY.

A more even 3 step movement scenario is also a possibility as are several others.

[sbhagwat2000]

Niksammy,

There is still some uncertainty as to how quickly a queued up porting case might be processed by USCIS and whether they might get RFEs. I think bvsamrat assumes it will take some time.

Another valid scenario (discussed previously) based on what is basically a 2 step movement would be

a) July VB - little movement.
b) August VB - movement to the end of 2006 or end of 2007 depending on numbers.
c) September VB - movement to final date.
d) Internally retrogress in September when visa numbers are exhausted (usually about 2 weeks before the end of the FY).

The advantage is that, in general it preserves approval in PD order and ensures that if insufficient porting cases are approved in August (CO has to set the September VB in early August) that there are sufficient numbers of "ordinary" pre-adjudicated EB2 cases that can be quickly approved to use up available numbers.

Again, the disadvantage for many is that later PDs will be Current for only one month and it will again be a lottery as to who gets approved and who doesn't before visa numbers are exhausted for the FY.

A more even 3 step movement scenario is also a possibility as are several others.

I know I have been very pessimistic today but spec when you mentioned internal retrogression I remembered I wanted to ask this question. Could it be that internally EB2I dates are currently internally retrogressed to say some date in late 2003 and they are still showing 2004. And hence even when we get SO dates will move a bit. The reason I say this is a friend of mine has a PD of August 2004 and his 485 application was made in 2011. Its still stuck with no decision. He was saying that his lawyer thinks his case is not getting touched since theres demand before him thats not been met monthly.

[MATT2012]

Thanks Spec, I was a silent reader in many forums for many years. Finally one day, I thought it is not fair of me not to contribute. I learned a lot from you. I just acknowledged the same.

Matt,

That truly is an excellent summary above.

It explains both why the conclusions have been reached and where the uncertainties lie.

If our exchanges have helped, that all good - I have benefited equally. Your praise is very generous, but unwarranted.

Ultimately, it's all a collaborative effort, but you should take full credit for this piece of work. I'll repeat it again - this really is an excellent summary.

[Spectator]

I know I have been very pessimistic today but spec when you mentioned internal retrogression I remembered I wanted to ask this question. Could it be that internally EB2I dates are currently internally retrogressed to say some date in late 2003 and they are still showing 2004. And hence even when we get SO dates will move a bit. The reason I say this is a friend of mine has a PD of August 2004 and his 485 application was made in 2011. Its still stuck with no decision. He was saying that his lawyer thinks his case is not getting touched since theres demand before him thats not been met monthly.

sbhagwat2000,

My personal opinion is that would not be the case.

Internal retrogression is a last gasp tool available to the Visa Office when visa numbers run out for a period.

The most extreme example of that was last year, when EB2-IC visas ran out between the April 2012 VB being announced in early March and it coming into force on April 1.

In fact, to deliberately set a VB Cut Off Date that was later then the number of visas available would be a violation of the INA.

To date, of the 107 Trackitt EB2-I approvals, 53 have a 2003 PD and 46 have a 2004 PD. Of those, 3 have had an August 2004 PD.

[sbhagwat2000]

some more info from the same person - apparently there was no mention of FB



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Ware
Date: Monday, April 15, 2013
Subject: RE: [General inquiries] EB2I movement



No.

David Ware
Attorney at law
Ware|Gasparian
3850 N. Causeway Blvd., Suite 555
Metairie Louisiana 70002-1752
Phone: (504) 830 5900/(800) 537 0179
Fax: (504) 830 5909
Other Locations: Baton Rouge. Jackson. Pensacola. Birmingham. Seattle
To visit our website, click on the logo below.
If you wish to make an appointment: Please call Yolanda Mata at the numbers above.





-----Original Message-----
From: info@david-ware.com [mailto:info@david-ware.com] On Behalf Of@gmail.com
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 2:51 PM
To: David Ware
Subject: [General inquiries] EB2I movement

shailesh bhagwat sent a message using the contact form at http://david-ware.com/contact.

Hello,

Thanks for your reply this morning regarding Charles Oppenheim's comments about EB2I movement. It is very kind of you to share details. I was a bit taken aback with the news that EBI will move only by a few weeks. The reason being in the february bulletin 18000 visas were added to the total 140000 visas that were unused family based visas from the prior year. I was thinking EB2I will get a large chunk of those visas and hence would move forward substantially. Did Mr. Oppenheim say anything specific about these extra visas going to EB2I?
Again I really appreciate your help. As you can see EB2I applicants are really suffering because of retrogression

[vizcard]

David is a really loquacious guy

[Spectator]

David is a really loquacious guy

vizcard,

LOL.

It's possible that as a result of sharing the information he had, his email is now being bombarded with requests for more info.

Let's not add to that.

On another note, assuming the meeting did take place on, or around April 6, 2013, CO was certainly aware of the extra 18k from FB. The DD and Annual Numerical Limits documents were updated in early to mid February.

Of course, the $64,000 question is whether his reply took those into account or not. If the question was not asked, which it seems clear it wasn't, then we will never know.

For me, like Matt, there is nothing further to be gained from this information as it stands.

[Vkkpnm]

I would like to see numerical/circumstantial evidence to come to any conclusion.

But coming to his calculation, he has point that EB1 has used more visas in the past, but that was before Karzarian. I am not saying it cannot happen again. Any normal logic will suggest to spillovers even before, FB SO came in.

I partly agree on EB5, it is a possible scenario given the increase in applications.

EB2 WW- There is no evidence that it is headed over 42K, this is taking into consideration around 25K already consumed.

Thanks Matt. You have kept our hopes alive.