EB2-3 Predictions (Rather Calculations) - 2014

[longgcque]

How do we know they are re-doing IBIS check? Is it an assumption or from a source ?

[/

hope your instinct turns out to be true....btw, can you share the source of this information about IBIS check?

[gkjppp]

longgcque, i see 485 RFE for EVL, i guess you did not invoke AC21 your attorney might have missed to include while filing.

[bvsamrat]

Excellent complilation

The 2013 SOFAD may be between these number: 22,000 Min, 32,000 Max and 26, 000 Avg.

Regards

This might help you.

http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showth...FY2008-Onwards

[GCKnowHow]

I may be wrong. But my instinct on 2 cents - Next bulletin might have surprise update on PD upto July 2008 as I guess some cases up to 2008 are getting revived probably for IBIS check.

I wish its true. Is your comment based on some observation/tip?

[longgcque]

My company lawyer does this kind of 485 filing for everyone .. they do not have EVL as part of there checklist(though 485 instruction checklist mentions it is a must) .. these fools costed me atleast 18 months more to stay in my current job(my rfe came on 3/21/2012 .. else it would have been an approval.. internal retro happened from 3/23/2012). .. Luck was not on my side i guess

I have not yet invoked AC21

longgcque, i see 485 RFE for EVL, i guess you did not invoke AC21 your attorney might have missed to include while filing.

[idiotic]

Thanks vizcard for posting the link to Spec's data. I also used Spec's data about the actual number of visas allocated due to fb spillover and plotted them against the actual number of EB2 visas received by India.

FY 2008 --- 22704 --- 14806
FY 2009 --- 0 --- 10106
FY 2010 --- 10657 --- 19961
FY 2011 --- 0 --- 23997
FY 2012 --- 4951 --- 19726

Looking at 2009 and 2011 data I intend to beleive that X may range between 10k to 23k. Adding that to X+12.9

We are looking at minimum of 22.9 t0 36k.

Even if it is 22.9k, I am incliined to beleive that CO will tend to build inventory again so as not to waste visa numbers in FY2014(even if it is a small movement).

Please let me know if my assumption is fair.

[openaccount]

watch out for latest updates from CO. AILA updated in recent postings section.

2/22/2013 Visa Office Update on Priority Dates and Demand (Updated 2/22/13)) 
Notes from conversations between Mike Nowlan & Roberta Freedman, AILA national committee members, and Charlie Oppenheim of the Visa Office. Topics discussed include the Visa Bulletin, visa demand in employment preference categories, and predictions for FY2013. AILA Doc. No. 12012349.

[vizcard]

Thanks vizcard for posting the link to Spec's data. I also used Spec's data about the actual number of visas allocated due to fb spillover and plotted them against the actual number of EB2 visas received by India.

FY 2008 --- 22704 --- 14806
FY 2009 --- 0 --- 10106
FY 2010 --- 10657 --- 19961
FY 2011 --- 0 --- 23997
FY 2012 --- 4951 --- 19726

Looking at 2009 and 2011 data I intend to beleive that X may range between 10k to 23k. Adding that to X+12.9

We are looking at minimum of 22.9 t0 36k.

Even if it is 22.9k, I am incliined to beleive that CO will tend to build inventory again so as not to waste visa numbers in FY2014(even if it is a small movement).

Please let me know if my assumption is fair.

The FB numbers are included in the actual SOFAD. The reason is the FB numbers are not a separate bucket. They get added to the normal allocation of EB and then it follows the same SO rules. So you would be double counting in that situation.

I think we will be around the 20K mark for this year (including the 13K from FB). I don't really see a situation where there won't be sufficient demand for FY14. I can see a big forward movement in the early part of FY15 though.

[Niksammy]

watch out for latest updates from CO. AILA updated in recent postings section.

2/22/2013 Visa Office Update on Priority Dates and Demand (Updated 2/22/13)) 
Notes from conversations between Mike Nowlan & Roberta Freedman, AILA national committee members, and Charlie Oppenheim of the Visa Office. Topics discussed include the Visa Bulletin, visa demand in employment preference categories, and predictions for FY2013. AILA Doc. No. 12012349.

The article you might be talking about has already been posted on another site www.lawbench.com on 13th Feb 2013 (Click on immigration-news link to see the article)

I believe that this meeting took place before CO was aware of 18K wind fall from FB.

[Spectator]

The article you might be talking about has already been posted on another site www.lawbench.com on 13th Feb 2013 (Click on immigration-news link to see the article)

I believe that this meeting took place before CO was aware of 18K wind fall from FB.

Niksammy,

Thanks for drawing our attention to that article. I wonder what the Feb 22, 2013 update is?

It confirms that EB1-C and EB1-I have already exceeded their 7% limit for the year, but fall across within EB1 can accommodate that.

It also mentions that in December 2012, 125 of the EB2-I approvals had a PD of 2003 or earlier and that USCIS are not working to provide better visibility of the numbers.

It also appears that cases are tagged as Principal or Dependent already, since CO was able to say 45% of cases are for Principal applicants. That's good to hear, since it will make it very easy if Dependents are excluded from Numerical Limits in future.

[openaccount]

The article you might be talking about has already been posted on another site www.lawbench.com on 13th Feb 2013 (Click on immigration-news link to see the article)

I believe that this meeting took place before CO was aware of 18K wind fall from FB.

thanks for the link, latest from AILA could be a new update from CO this week, we will know in next few days

Full article link:http://www.lawbench.com/immigration-...backlog-issues

from the article: "One little known fact offered by Mr. Oppenheim is that unused Family-based (FB) cases can be used for Employment-based (EB cases), but this does not usually occur because of heavy FB usage."

was CO aware of FB extra numbers when he released March VB looks like he is not from above statement

[Niksammy]

Why would CO talk to same set of lawyers twice in a span of 10 days? I think that EITHER someone on AILA might have forgotten to post that information on their web site earlier OR CO really likes both these gentlemen/lawyers in question and wants to convey good news to Eb2I community through them.

The probability of later happening before next few months is equal to probability of Washington Redskins winning a super bowl next year - which is almost zero . Though I would love to be wrong this time

[vizcard]

thanks for the link, latest from AILA could be a new update from CO this week, we will know in next few days

Full article link:http://www.lawbench.com/immigration-...backlog-issues

from the article: "One little known fact offered by Mr. Oppenheim is that unused Family-based (FB) cases can be used for Employment-based (EB cases), but this does not usually occur because of heavy FB usage."

was CO aware of FB extra numbers when he released March VB looks like he is not from above statement

He certainly was not aware of it. Hence the "revised" demand data document that came out a few days after the original document (and visa bulletin). Whether he would have done anything with that knowledge is another matter.

[Spectator]

The FB numbers are included in the actual SOFAD. The reason is the FB numbers are not a separate bucket. They get added to the normal allocation of EB and then it follows the same SO rules. So you would be double counting in that situation.

I think we will be around the 20K mark for this year (including the 13K from FB). I don't really see a situation where there won't be sufficient demand for FY14. I can see a big forward movement in the early part of FY15 though.

vizcard,

Agree with everything you said, including the approximate number.

In the FY2012 figures, idiotic would also have to take into account that the 19.7k figure is 6-8k higher than it would normally have been, due to use of visas that normally would have been used by EB2-WW.

[Kanmani]

Spec,

Is it not too low, just 7000 excluding FB ?

Co is expecting a fall down from Eb1 is possible in a scenario that FB numbers were NOT in their count (!)

[Spectator]

Spec,

Is it not too low, just 7000 excluding FB ?

Co is expecting a fall down from Eb1 is possible in a scenario that FB numbers were NOT in their count (!)

Kanmani,

It would have been much higher, but FY2013 is payback time for those extra EB2-WW visas used in FY2012.

I am allowing spillover from EB1.

Granted 7k might be at the low end of the range.

On the other hand, EB1-IC seem to have used 6k in about 4 months according to CO. At that rate, EB1-IC alone would use about 18k in a full year. That probably isn't a fair extrapolation, but it does give food for thought.

[Kanmani]

Thanks Spec. Thats disappointing.

[edisonguy]

Thanks Spec. Thats disappointing.

Now does it mean no spillover from EB1. ? So now does it confirms no spillover of 18K as calculated by Spec earlier.

[edisonguy]

does it mean no spill over from EB1 ? What happens to your earlier prediction of 18K spillover at the last quarter.

[Kanmani]

Now does it mean no spillover from EB1. ? So now does it confirms no spillover of 18K as calculated by Spec earlier.

There will be some fall down visas from Eb1 but by law, it should go to Eb2 WW if there is high demand . Eb2I was over allocated with some 8k visas last year which was borrowed from Eb2WW, hence a high demand in EB2ww is expected this FY.

[qesehmk]

Kanmani
I am not sure about that. I would think that a fall down or fall across is supposed to be applied to the entire category strictly by oldest PD. Extra demand in eb2row can't eat up any fd. It will limit any fa though.

There will be some fall down visas from Eb1 but by law, it should go to Eb2 WW if there is high demand . Eb2I was over allocated with some 8k visas last year which was borrowed from Eb2WW, hence a high demand in EB2ww is expected this FY.

[Kanmani]

Kanmani
I am not sure about that. I would think that a fall down or fall across is supposed to be applied to the entire category strictly by oldest PD. Extra demand in eb2row can't eat up any fd. It will limit any fa though.

Q,

We have beaten this topic to death in our 2011 thread in the context of Eb3 if by chance gets some spillover, then those extra visas will be used by the WW under the 7% per country limitation subsection. I believe this hold true for EB2 too.

[Niksammy]

Q/Spec,

What do you think will be the approximate spill over number for EB2 I?

[Spectator]

Kanmani
I am not sure about that. I would think that a fall down or fall across is supposed to be applied to the entire category strictly by oldest PD. Extra demand in eb2row can't eat up any fd. It will limit any fa though.

Q,

I thought we had beaten this to death before.

Spillover only becomes available to Countries that have already reached their Numerical Limit IF there are no "otherwise qualified applicants". Since Countries in WW will not have reached their Numerical Limit, they ARE "otherwise qualified applicants".

Last time we agreed (eventually) that if numbers FD from EB1 to EB2 they essentially raised the numbers available to EB2 and consequently the number that 7% represented within EB2.

Assuming every 7% limited Country needed visas and EB2-ROW still needed visas, for every 100 available as FD 7 would go to each Country at the 7% limit and 72 would go to EB2-ROW. Once EB2-ROW did not require further visas, those 72 would go to the earliest PD, regardless of whether the 7% limit had been reached.

The old discussion is here.

One thing that everybody agreed on was that all FD would not go to the earliest PD if any Country that had not reached the 7% limit still had demand.

[qesehmk]

Kanmani / Spec - Sorry. I was still stuck in my old interpretation and forgot this discussion. I guess my old interpretation doesn't matter for EB2 since EB2ROW always is current - especially with FD but my old interpretation diverges significantly from reality for EB3ROW that has large backlog. If ever EB3 received any SOFAD, unfortunately EB3IC are not going to get any of it until EB3ROW became current. A bitter truth.

Q,

We have beaten this topic to death in our 2011 thread in the context of Eb3 if by chance gets some spillover, then those extra visas will be used by the WW under the 7% per country limitation subsection. I believe this hold true for EB2 too.

Q,

I thought we had beaten this to death before.

Spillover only becomes available to Countries that have already reached their Numerical Limit IF there are no "otherwise qualified applicants". Since Countries in WW will not have reached their Numerical Limit, they ARE "otherwise qualified applicants".

Last time we agreed (eventually) that if numbers FD from EB1 to EB2 they essentially raised the numbers available to EB2 and consequently the number that 7% represented within EB2.

Assuming every 7% limited Country needed visas and EB2-ROW still needed visas, for every 100 available as FD 7 would go to each Country at the 7% limit and 72 would go to EB2-ROW. Once EB2-ROW did not require further visas, those 72 would go to the earliest PD, regardless of whether the 7% limit had been reached.

The old discussion is here.

One thing that everybody agreed on was that all FD would not go to the earliest PD if any Country that had not reached the 7% limit still had demand.