EB2-3 Predictions (Rather Calculations) - 2014

[Spectator]

These numbers are flat out wrong. Useless data.

sports,

Why do you say that?

The Receipt and Completion figures (where they are in both reports) agree to the other Quarterly reports published recently.

I think your statement deserves more explanation.

[Feb262009]

Gurus,
When do you think we will know if the medical check waiver will be extended or not. In case it is not extended, I wonder regarding the effect of renewal of medical check in EB2 India dates movement . Don't you think if medical test needs to be re-validated, it will be better to move the dates in July bulletin to allow time to receive and process the RFE responses? Otherwise They will have only 2 month to send RFE and process. Then I believe they will move the dates more than necessary to ensure no Visa is wasted.

[qesehmk]

Those numbers are jumbled up with family and all sorts of numbers.

That is why when USCIS this year posted Quarterly performance data I called it - "Holy Grail of data" !!


The quarterly data separates family from employment and shows isolated Quaterly performance i.e. how many came and how many approved and denied by FB vs EB vs Others in a quarter.

The dashboard data does NOT separate FB from EB. That's why it looks garbage to you.

I apologize if I am not reading the numbers right.

I tried to find 485 completions for NSC and TSC each. I found that if I added all completion numbers for NSC alone, that was coming to almost 62K. Unless I am missing something, how can NSC alone grant 62K green cards when the total quota is 150K?

I also found that NSC and TSC each were completing 10K cases each in February and March, which is too high a figure.

Perhaps I am not adding the numbers correctly. Spec, can you correct me? I was trying to infer how many green cards were already given out in the EB category.

Aside from the raw numbers, as far as the trend is concerned, it did not look good in March. There is a noticeable jump in 485 completions at both NSC and TSC. In fact, the number of completions almost doubled for TSC after dipping to extremely low levels in November/December.

[Jagan01]

The USCIS Dashboard has just been updated with the March 2014 Figures.

The jump in March for I-140 looks concerning.

[Spectator]

I apologize if I am not reading the numbers right.

I tried to find 485 completions for NSC and TSC each. I found that if I added all completion numbers for NSC alone, that was coming to almost 62K. Unless I am missing something, how can NSC alone grant 62K green cards when the total quota is 150K?

I also found that NSC and TSC each were completing 10K cases each in February and March, which is too high a figure.

Perhaps I am not adding the numbers correctly. Spec, can you correct me? I was trying to infer how many green cards were already given out in the EB category.

Aside from the raw numbers, as far as the trend is concerned, it did not look good in March. There is a noticeable jump in 485 completions at both NSC and TSC. In fact, the number of completions almost doubled for TSC after dipping to extremely low levels in November/December.

sports,

No problem. Thanks for your further explanation. I understand the context of your comment now.

What you are trying to do would only be valid if NSC and TSC only dealt with EB cases, but that is far from the truth. They also deal with a large number of Refugee and Asylum cases.

From the I-485 Performance Data for Q2 FY2014 we know that EB I-485 Receipts only accounted for 38.6% of NSC receipts, 71.1% of TSC receipts and 51.8% of combined NSC/TSC receipts for Q2. The respective figures for Q1 FY2014 were 34.2%, 72.9% and 51% respectively.

For I-485 Completions, EB only accounted for 37.0% at NSC in Q2, 75.1% at TSC and 54.1% for NSC/TSC overall. In Q1, the figures were 45.3%, 81.1% and 59.9% respectively.

The number of EB approvals (completions) by USCIS (therefore only AOS cases) to the end of Q2 FY2014 was given in the All Forms report for Q2 FY2014 at 62,352 (65,788). That was broken down by Q1 = 31,702 (33,526) and Q2 = 30,651 (32,262).

I don't think the approval jump in March was entirely unexpected. March (according to Trackitt) saw a large number of EB1 and EB3 approvals. As you say, it was from a very low base in Dec/Jan and had also increased in Feb.

I hope that throws some light on the figures.

[Spectator]

The jump in March for I-140 looks concerning.

Jagan,

My take is that the increase in I-140 receipts and completions reflects the increased pace of PERM Certifications during that period (7.4k in March vs 4.9k in Feb).

Some pretty sketchy data suggests that the vast majority of new I-140 applicants are choosing Premium Processing where they are able to. That shouldn't be a surprise. They have waited a long time to file, if PERM based and I-140 processing times for regular cases appear very slow.

[vizcard]

The jump in March for I-140 looks concerning.

I can see next year being a problem with this I140 data plus the pick up in PERM processing after the initial slowdown.

[Spectator]

I can see next year being a problem with this I140 data plus the pick up in PERM processing after the initial slowdown.

Perverse as it may sound, I think very low EB2-WW approvals this year is possibly the worst scenario for EB2-I in the medium term.

[Spectator]

Why do you say that spec? Instead of EB2-ROW giving 16K this year and 0 next year, how is it "better" if they gave away 8K this year and 8K next year? I may be missing some weird dynamic though...such as EB2-ROW sucking in some additional spillover from EB1 next year should the 16k/0 situation materialize; numbers that would otherwise be available to EB2I in the 8k/8k scenario.

In a straight forward case, I would prefer the 16K/0 scenario because it ends the agony of 8K people earlier by 1 year.

I can't think of a way to explain it either simply or concisely.

Suffice to say that the lower the approvals this year, the higher they are likely to be next year.

Too low and a tipping point is reached where there is no spillover to EB2-I.

The normal allocation to EB2-I is probably not sufficient to satisfy even porting from those who already have an I-485 and the pent up, unsatisfied porting demand increases.

When SO does become available, a large amount of it will be consumed by the pent up porting demand, either immediately or in the following year.

In the worst case, the increased number of EB2-WW cases causes causes little to no spillover for 2 years.

In FY2012 EB2-WW only used 25k due to retrogression caused by over allocation to EB2-I. The next year, EB2-WW used 42.6k. Had there only been 140k EB visas available in FY2013, EB2-WW would have needed 8.2k Fall Down to satisfy the demand. There would only have been 5.8k FD available and 2.4k would still have been needed from the next year's allocation. Since then, both EB1 and EB5 use appears to have increased.

If visas available to EB2-I falls below the underlying porting demand, it can possibly condemn EB2-I to very heavily retrogressed Cut Off Dates for some time. That is my worry and I think that would be a very depressing scenario.

If the numbers available are slightly more than the porting demand each year, it allows the Cut Off Dates to move slightly forward each year from the best case the previous year, which means a large movement at the end of the year. That gives people some hope they might be approved.

I suppose it depends on whether a person is likely to be approved or not this year with large numbers as to how they might feel about it.

That's already too wordy a reply and I have still not done it justice.

It is a worst case, but not impossible scenario. I am not saying it would happen (certainly not the worst case) - note I did use the word "possible" in my original post.

[sairam09]

Spec,

Will today's dashboard release, Change your predictions?

[redwood]

Every year is different, so lets take this year spillover and see where the next spillover will come from. We would not have spillover this year, if not for the sequestration. Sequestration was the best EBI immigration reform from the Republican and the tea party folks, it was almost half as good as HR3012. If the Govt shutdown hadn't happened, then the budget deal would not have been reached and sequestration would have continued. We would have had 34-35K PERMs approved this year too... But alas, I blame Ted Cruz for this .

For next year,

I am hopeful EB3I would move much faster providing relief to EB2I too.
In the USCIS dashboard, I see non-perm I-140 filings (EB1 and EB2NIW) dip by a lot over the last couple of months. I came to the conclusion by subtracting PERM approvals from I-140 filings. Hope the trend continues.

Hope is a dangerous thing

I can't think of a way to explain it either simply or concisely.

Suffice to say that the lower the approvals this year, the higher they are likely to be next year.

Too low and a tipping point is reached where there is no spillover to EB2-I.

The normal allocation to EB2-I is probably not sufficient to satisfy even porting from those who already have an I-485 and the pent up, unsatisfied porting demand increases.

When SO does become available, a large amount of it will be consumed by the pent up porting demand, either immediately or in the following year.

In the worst case, the increased number of EB2-WW cases causes causes little to no spillover for 2 years.

In FY2012 EB2-WW only used 25k due to retrogression caused by over allocation to EB2-I. The next year, EB2-WW used 42.6k. Had there only been 140k EB visas available in FY2013, EB2-WW would have needed 8.2k Fall Down to satisfy the demand. There would only have been 5.8k FD available and 2.4k would still have been needed from the next year's allocation. Since then, both EB1 and EB5 use appears to have increased.

If visas available to EB2-I falls below the underlying porting demand, it can possibly condemn EB2-I to very heavily retrogressed Cut Off Dates for some time. That is my worry and I think that would be a very depressing scenario.

If the numbers available are slightly more than the porting demand each year, it allows the Cut Off Dates to move slightly forward each year from the best case the previous year, which means a large movement at the end of the year. That gives people some hope they might be approved.

I suppose it depends on whether a person is likely to be approved or not this year with large numbers as to how they might feel about it.

That's already too wordy a reply and I have still not done it justice.

It is a worst case, but not impossible scenario. I am not saying it would happen (certainly not the worst case) - note I did use the word "possible" in my original post.

[Spectator]

Every year is different, so lets take this year spillover and see where the next spillover will come from. We would not have spillover this year, if not for the sequestration. Sequestration was the best EBI immigration reform from the Republican and the tea party folks, it was almost half as good as HR3012. If the Govt shutdown hadn't happened, then the budget deal would not have been reached and sequestration would have continued. We would have had 34-35K PERMs approved this year too... But alas, I blame Ted Cruz for this .

For next year,

I am hopeful EB3I would move much faster providing relief to EB2I too.
In the USCIS dashboard, I see non-perm I-140 filings (EB1 and EB2NIW) dip by a lot over the last couple of months. I came to the conclusion by subtracting PERM approvals from I-140 filings. Hope the trend continues.

Hope is a dangerous thing

redwood,

I kind of agree with you.

I presented an Armageddon scenario that probably won't come to pass. I don't expect many people to agree with it as even a possibility.

I have learned that something always comes along to stop it happening. In that respect, EB2-I has dodged the bullet for many years now, whether it be due to low EB1 approvals, over allocation or extra FB visa numbers.

Hope is not a dangerous thing. I guess that comes from one of my favourite films, The Shawshank Redemption:

Red: Let me tell you something my friend. Hope is a dangerous thing. Hope can drive a man insane.

but later

Andy Dufresne: Remember, Red. Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies.

I prefer Andy's outlook.

On the other hand, another quote also seems to sum up the GC process for many.

These prison walls are funny. First you hate 'em, then you get used to 'em. Enough time passes, gets so you depend on them. That's institutionalized. They send you here for life, that's exactly what they take. The part that counts anyways.

[Kanmani]

redwood,

I kind of agree with you.

I presented an Armageddon scenario that probably won't come to pass. I don't expect many people to agree with it as even a possibility.

I have learned that something always comes along to stop it happening. In that respect, EB2-I has dodged the bullet for many years now, whether it be due to low EB1 approvals, over allocation or extra FB visa numbers.

Hope is not a dangerous thing. I guess that comes from one of my favourite films, The Shawshank Redemption:



but later



I prefer Andy's outlook.

On the other hand, another quote also seems to sum up the GC process for many.

Hey Spec, I enjoyed your quotes.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies" was my signature until the demise of HR3012. I was so immature those days, a perfect slap on my face.

But I still believe in Hope

[geevikram]

"I prefer Andy's outlook.

On the other hand, another quote also seems to sum up the GC process for many."

This is my favorite movie of all time and this specific quote is the best one. Thank you Spec and others for all your work. 7/3/08 here, "hoping" to make it this year.

[redwood]

Great Post Spec !

I do not however want to ignore your earlier point about the Armageddon scenario for EB2I. It is a very real possibility and hence I have started looking at EB3ROW as a source for spillover to EB3I (and EB2I, similar to EBC).

Have you looked at such a scenario and what does your analysis say based on limited data (current EB3ROW inventory data and assuming we have 3-5K EB3ROW PERMs annually) ?

[Spectator]

Great Post Spec !

I do not however want to ignore your earlier point about the Armageddon scenario for EB2I. It is a very real possibility and hence I have started looking at EB3ROW as a source for spillover to EB3I (and EB2I, similar to EBC).

Have you looked at such a scenario and what does your analysis say based on limited data (current EB3ROW inventory data and assuming we have 3-5K EB3ROW PERMs annually) ?

Thanks for the kind words everybody. It's clear people think the quote is as apt as I do.

[sairam09]

05/21/2014: Forthcoming Policy Change Announcement of USCIS on the Validity of I-693 on File Older Than One Year


• Under the current policy, in any case that is adjudicated on or before May 31, 2014, the officer must accept as valid a form that was signed more than one year before the date of the adjudication on a pending adjustment of status application.

• This policy in the form a policy manual will expire on May 31, 2014. Unless a new policy extending the validity of I-693 which is older than one year is issued before the end of this month, any I-693 which is on file with the USCIS and which is older than one year will automatically turn "invalid" and under the USCIS policy manual, the adjudicators of I-485 applications must issue RFEs to the I-485 waiters to go through another medical examination and submit renewed I-693.

• Those whose I-485 fits this description and pending before the agency should pay a close attention to the forthcoming release of the USCIS new policy during next week.

• This policy change can affect EB-2 I-485 waiters somewhat negatively, particularly for Indians, considering the fact that the EB-2 visa numbers may potentially move forward upto August 2008 in the 4th Quarter of FY 2014 (July-September 2014), the I-693 RFEs can delay adjudication of the pending I-485 applications.

• It is interesting to watch in what way the USCIS will accommodate this issue in the forthcoming announcement.

http://www.immigration-law.com/

[sairam09]

Oops i forgot to add that! Thanks Spec.

[vizcard]

I wonder where he came up with the "August 2008" estimate. If it has anything to do with even slight insider information, that's already a huge improvement over the last reported "January 2008" estimate. Considering that these estimates are super conservative to begin with (case in point: last years Feb 2008 turned out to be June 2008), I feel confident we will see the end of 2008 this year.

In an ironic twist, asking us to resubmit the medicals can only be helpful: The DOS will have to entertain the possibility of several hundreds (and potentially even a few thousand) people failing to respond in a timely manner, so the date will be pushed even more. I am an ardent advocate of the date being pushed as far as possible even at the risk of missing out several people in the window (that may include me as well).

I dont think people who don't get their GC but someone way behind then gets one will appreciate your sentiment.

In any case, this year will be very interesting (isn't ever year? ) with the RFE process. The timing of them sending mass RFEs out, getting them back and then processing them in some semblance of order will be wild. I know I will be pissed with an Aug 2008 PD to miss the boat due to administrative crap.

[Spectator]

I dont think people who don't get their GC but someone way behind then gets one will appreciate your sentiment.

In any case, this year will be very interesting (isn't ever year? ) with the RFE process. The timing of them sending mass RFEs out, getting them back and then processing them in some semblance of order will be wild. I know I will be pissed with an Aug 2008 PD to miss the boat due to administrative crap.

vizcard,

I still retain some hope that USCIS will publish a Memo of some kind regarding Medical Examinations, otherwise they might as well start sending out RFEs to the 2012 filers up to a certain PD. If there is a Memo, I don't think it will be a simple one year extension, but rather setting a fixed validity of maybe 3-5 years. It's getting so late now, that maybe it is just wishful thinking. If there is no Memo, I think it is a very unfortunate (to avoid using stronger language) decision.

I don't think it does any favours overall to "over push" the date movement. Not only does it introduce inequities in the PDs for EB2-I that are approved, but at a wider scale it has become unfair to EB3. Such is the pace of EB2-I approvals at the end of the year, that total EB numbers run out because EB2 is over-allocated, leaving EB3 with less than their own allocation. I think that says an awful lot about the control mechanisms (or lack thereof) for visa issuance against Category limits.

Last year was just plain silly. The numbers available to EB2-I from SO could not support such a large forward movement of the COD. Not only did EB3 not receive their full allocation, but EB as a whole overshot the total allocation. Even then, there was still something like another net 4k cases that had to wait for FY2014 to begin to be approved. That's more than 80% more than the spillover available to EB2 in FY2013.

I support movement that ensures no visas are wasted (so some contingency is required), but it has to be done in a sensible way.

[tomhagen]

I doubt about it .. for example in 2011, for EB2 it is progressing at 3 months per bulletin. If that would have continued we wouldn't have been in this mess. Porting would have been under control, visa wastage wouldn't have been there. Definitely DOS has to employ some good data analysts

[Spectator]

At the outset, let me put this firmly in the classification of RUMOUR. Please read it with the pinch of salt it deserves. It doesn't entirely mesh with the EB2-C COD movement to date, unless that suddenly slows.

The Chinese recently contacted CO to ask about EB2-C use for the FY to date. Part of the reason seems to be that the April Inventory only showed a drop of 212 from the January Inventory figures. CO replied on May 27, 2014, but his actual reply is not quoted.

Frankly, I am struggling with the Chinese translation, but it appears that CO said that, to date, EB2-C had used in excess of 85% of their allocation for the FY. He also pointed out that the Inventory did not cover all cases, citing new filings, District Office, and CP (as best I can tell).

It is possible and it would make some sense to finish the EB2-C approvals before the EB2-I approvals begin, to avoid wastage of their allocation.

There is a flaw in the logic surrounding the 212 reduction. That is just the net reduction in the Inventory.

In reality there are additions as well as approvals, which lowers the net number.

Looking at just the months with reductions, the change Jan-Apr is 815. Similarly, although the net reduction for Oct-Jan was only 687, looking at only months with reductions, this rises to 903.

That is a total of at least 1,718 for the period Oct-Mar. There will be further approvals that are masked by those months that show an overall increase in applications and a further 2 months has now passed since the Inventory period.

I will repeat - this is not entirely verified information (not least due to translation issues), but I thought some people might find it interesting nonetheless.

The original thread is here and translated.

I couldn't reconcile the 960 number mentioned to my satisfaction (perhaps he meant 960+ approvals in the Jan-Mar period).

[sairam09]

Interesting CH can communicate with CO..

[Spectator]

Spec,

Thanks for the info. I am really surprised to know that the Chinese have such a communication channel with CO. I really wonder if the unfortunate folks from EB2/3I have a similar thing?

Also, I wonder if this has got a significance to EB2I as well. Does it point to increased porting (unlikely since EB3C was actually ahead), more NIW or any such bad things that can impact EB2I movement?

The Chinese have always seemed to have fairly good communication channels with CO in particular.

The data no longer seems to be available, but NIU managed to get some I-140 approval data from USCIS (perhaps via FOIA) in the past covering CY2005 to September 2012.

I have a copy, but since it was labeled "Exclusive", I don't think it is appropriate to publish it.

[qesehmk]

I think the trick is CH approach CO as a group. I dont think CO is unapproachable but it has to be reasonable request coming from a group rather than individual.

The Chinese have always seemed to have fairly good communication channels with CO in particular.

The data no longer seems to be available, but NIU managed to get some I-140 approval data from USCIS (perhaps via FOIA) in the past covering CY2005 to September 2012.

I have a copy, but since it was labeled "Exclusive", I don't think it is appropriate to publish it.