EB2-3 Predictions (Rather Calculations) 2015-2020

[dreamze]

You are absolutely right. Both statements - "spillover is only applied from june" and "upto 3 months monthly movement thru June" are contradictory and both cannot be true at the same time. If we see any movement in next bulletin that means they already started applying SO from next bulletin.

[Zevrap]

EB3 here are my quick "opinions".

Spillover - I think none are in play yet.
Movement - I believe EB3 should have a good year including EB3India. Not so EB2. We may see EB5 retrogress.
Porting - Yes I agree that porting pre 2007 should come to dead end. However 2K per quarter is very high. If you think about it - DOS is making it equitable to EB3ROW folks to allow them sufficient time to get adjudicated after porting. However their view of visa supply may prove wrong. (in simpler words the filing date for EB2India may be over optimistic).
China EB3 - I haven't checked lately. I wonder if EB3C as large CP backlog. That may prevent it from being current.

Based on the limited available eb row approval data for last 3 months, can you tell if this year will be a better one for eb2i.
Thamk

[HarepathekaIntezar]

Based on the limited available eb row approval data for last 3 months, can you tell if this year will be a better one for eb2i.
Thamk

Dude, that is exactly what the post is about - that EB2I is screwed this year!! Which part of it don't you understand?

[Zevrap]

Dude, that is exactly what the post is about - that EB2I is screwed this year!! Which part of it don't you understand?

If I were to understand I would not had asked.
All I want to know is, will this year eb2i receive 7000 visas?

[HarepathekaIntezar]

If I were to understand I would not had asked.
All I want to know is, will this year eb2i receive 7000 visas?

Well, there is a possibility of that happening. Given the demand analysis that I saw in another forum that one user Chatpata123 did for EB3, if I use the same logic, the EB2ROW demand has been slowing down from May 2015 (possibly because ROW's stopped upgrading from EB3 to EB2, since EB3 also advanced fast last year).

But if 7000 visas are issued, you have to note that around 10 - 15% of that will go to CP Cases, which does not reflect in USCIS Inventory. The other imponderable is the porters from EB3. So, if you are using that number to predict if you will get GC, it may not work out.

But you will have a clear picture in July for sure. So just relax till July.

[vishnu]

Hi Spec

Do these predictions (which you made early Feb) change significantly with the published inventory?

As always, please take the following with a pinch of salt. It is a best effort, but the variables mean it can never be truly accurate and has wide error margins.

FY2016

EB1

Even though approvals look slightly lower at this stage, I expect EB1 to use its allocation, or close to it.

EB4

I-360 receipts and approvals have exploded, probably due to use of the SIJ subcategory by unaccompanied minors. Approvals in FY2015 were 26.4k compared to 16.9k in FY2014.

I don't expect any spare visas from EB4.

EB5

EB5-China remains retrogressed and the backlog is increasing, so no spare visas from EB5.

Family Based Visas from FY2015

The published data suggests that there will be only a few spare FB visas available to EB in FY2016.

EB2

Worldwide

If EB2-ROW approvals continue at a steady state, then they could use c. 25k of their 29k allocation. EB2-M should give FA along with some from EB2-P.

India

From such a long way out, the prospects for FY2016 for EB2-I look moderate, depending on your point of view.

At this point, it looks as if EB2-I might have 10-11k total visas available. That would be in line with the July 2009 filing date accepted by USCIS for a couple of months at the beginning of the FY.


EB3

India

An excellent chance of FA to EB3-I in FY2016. I can see EB3-I progressing into 2006.

[Spectator]

Hi Spec

Do these predictions (which you made early Feb) change significantly with the published inventory?

In the grand scheme of things - probably not.

EB2-ROW is a bit higher currently, but EB1 is lower.

The loss of FB visas is a big blow. 11k is a top end estimate based on the data available at the time.

The Inventory was exactly as I expected.

I'd stress again that the EB2-I Inventory has never dropped by the number of actual approvals in a FY, so it doesn't say that the date will move to one that represents that number in the Inventory, plus there have been approvals from October to January (although the number is uncertain).

[vishnu]

In the grand scheme of things - probably not.

EB2-ROW is a bit higher currently, but EB1 is lower.

The loss of FB visas is a big blow. 11k is a top end estimate based on the data available at the time.

The Inventory was exactly as I expected.

I'd stress again that the EB2-I Inventory has never dropped by the number of actual approvals in a FY, so it doesn't say that the date will move to one that represents that number in the Inventory, plus there have been approvals from October to January (although the number is uncertain).

Thanks spec... So I take that to mean that the 10,000 visas should get us beyond the date that would currently add up to 10k as per the inventory?

[Spectator]

Thanks spec... So I take that to mean that the 10,000 visas should get us beyond the date that would currently add up to 10k as per the inventory?

Other way round. The Inventory will reduce less than the number of approvals made.

For example, in FY2014 (last figures available), actual EB2-I approvals were 23,527. The USCIS Inventory reduced by only 12,276 between October 2013 and October 2014.

The USCIS Inventory for EB2-I usually only drops about 50-60% of actual approvals. It might be higher this year since more porting cases may have been in the Inventory as EB2.

[Spectator]

Table V of the DOS Visa Statistics has been published.

You can find a breakdown of the statistics here.

EB1-I received 12,253 visas in FY2015
EB2-I received 7,235 visas in FY2015
EB3-I received 7,026 visas in FY2015

EB4 used their entire allocation.

EB5 used less than their allocation, despite EB5-China being retrogressed.
EB1 used more than their allocation by using the spare EB5 visas.

There was no Fall Down from EB1 - all the SO came from within EB2.

In FB, India exceeded the 7% limit. 65% of approvals were in FB4 and 87% of approvals were in FB3 & FB4.

[EB3Iwaiting]

Table V of the DOS Visa Statistics has been published.

You can find a breakdown of the statistics here.

EB1-I received 12,253 visas in FY2015
EB2-I received 7,235 visas in FY2015
EB3-I received 7,026 visas in FY2015

Thanks Spec. I was going over the totals and it looks like EB2 got 4.5k visas extra and EB3 got 4.5k less. I thought the totals cannot exceed 40k. Are those all porting numbers from EB3I that were counted against EB2I and not EB3I? That seems to be the only explanation for the grand totals. What do you think?

[Spectator]

Thanks Spec. I was going over the totals and it looks like EB2 got 4.5k visas extra and EB3 got 4.5k less. I thought the totals cannot exceed 40k. Are those all porting numbers from EB3I that were counted against EB2I and not EB3I? That seems to be the only explanation for the grand totals. What do you think?

The total allocation for EB in FY2015 was 144,796 so 28.6% is 41,412.

EB2 can then also receive any spillover from EB4, EB5 and EB1. There's also the question of underuse in FB allowing more use in EB - it's a bit complicated.

Actual visas issued was 143,955 which is 841 less than the allocation - a wastage of 0.6% which is not bad (EB has been overallocated for the last 2 years). EB3 wastage of nearly 4k was very disappointing, so to a certain extent EB2 did receive more at the expense of EB3.

[EB3Iwaiting]

The total allocation for EB in FY2015 was 144,796 so 28.6% is 41,412.

EB2 can then also receive any spillover from EB4, EB5 and EB1. There's also the question of underuse in FB allowing more use in EB - it's a bit complicated.

Actual visas issued was 143,955 which is 841 less than the allocation - a wastage of 0.6% which is not bad (EB has been overallocated for the last 2 years). EB3 wastage of nearly 4k was very disappointing, so to a certain extent EB2 did receive more at the expense of EB3.

So, EB3Is not only get hosed by the Spillover law and CP cases from P but now overall EB3 quota getting decreased at the expense of EB2 quota getting increased. So, porting had no positive effect on EB3I. EB3Is just cannot catch a break.

[qesehmk]

....but now overall EB3 quota getting decreased at the expense of EB2 quota getting increased.

That's not exactly what Spec said. S/He is just trying to put an explanation on something that really has no explanation.

What DoS did here is bending if not breaking the visa allocation rules.

[EB3Iwaiting]

That's not exactly what Spec said. S/He is just trying to put an explanation on something that really has no explanation.

What DoS did here is bending if not breaking the visa allocation rules.

Thanks Q. I understand that Spec is simply trying to make sense as to what happened. But EB3 getting 4k less GCs should never happen specially since EB3I is the most backlogged EB category of all. EB2I should not get more than 41412 and EB3I should not get less than that.

[qesehmk]

Thanks Q. I understand that Spec is simply trying to make sense as to what happened. But EB3 getting 4k less GCs should never happen specially since EB3I is the most backlogged EB category of all. EB2I should not get more than 41412 and EB3I should not get less than that.

It clearly is unfair towards EB3 that they received less than the full quota. Whereas EB2 received more than what was legally possible. EB2 can receive more than just their own quota because EB4/5/1 can give EB2 some extra visas. But this year as you can see they received 3100 more (from godknowswhere) when they were only supposed to receive 2500 (what spec called "technical spillover).

Again - this is wholly unfair - and should be challenged by EB3-I folks.

Thanks a ton to Spec who has published an outstanding summary of table V from DOS 2015 report.

[Spectator]

I've also updated this post which shows historic allocations / SO from FY2008 to date.

[amulchandra]

It clearly is unfair towards EB3 that they received less than the full quota. Whereas EB2 received more than what was legally possible. EB2 can receive more than just their own quota because EB4/5/1 can give EB2 some extra visas. But this year as you can see they received 3100 more (from godknowswhere) when they were only supposed to receive 2500 (what spec called "technical spillover).

Again - this is wholly unfair - and should be challenged by EB3-I folks.

Thanks a ton to Spec who has published an outstanding summary of table V from DOS 2015 report.

Now I understand why DHS moved the cut off date to Dec 22 2004 in Sept 2015 visa bulletin for EB3 I. It was USCIS who messed up EB3 processing again. No wonder Eb3 I is stuck forever. Hope they make up for it this year.

[anuprab]

It clearly is unfair towards EB3 that they received less than the full quota. Whereas EB2 received more than what was legally possible. EB2 can receive more than just their own quota because EB4/5/1 can give EB2 some extra visas. But this year as you can see they received 3100 more (from godknowswhere) when they were only supposed to receive 2500 (what spec called "technical spillover).

Again - this is wholly unfair - and should be challenged by EB3-I folks.

Thanks a ton to Spec who has published an outstanding summary of table V from DOS 2015 report.

who, where and how do we challenge this Q..the Visagate lawsuit is pending despite all the hoopla and not to mention the resources it has...

[qesehmk]

who, where and how do we challenge this Q..the Visagate lawsuit is pending despite all the hoopla and not to mention the resources it has...

anuprab this is the fight of backlogged candidates particularly from India. I really don't care about legal basis or not but basically people are discriminated based on their country of origin and that should be challenged. All other issues like DoS wasting visas etc are peripheral.

People should go and fight it in American courts. You will be surprised how much you will be heard. But the backlogged folks must realize it is their fight. Nobody else is going to fight it for them.

[Spectator]

who, where and how do we challenge this Q..the Visagate lawsuit is pending despite all the hoopla and not to mention the resources it has...

Chinese EB3 applicants have already gone down this route with a very similar claim and lost. The case was Li versus Kerry and spanned 2010 to 2013.

Here's the appeal judgement.

[qesehmk]

The whole idea of country quota is discriminatory. Challenge that as point #1.

#2 - It is such a shame for bright talented folks (or anybody) to be used as slaves in the American companies. H1B is slavery. GC backlogs facilitate slavery.

Backlogged candidates must understand that path to victory will go through failures. A lot of you have spent enough time that you should have learnt about American values of freedom and justice and the right to pursue happiness.

[EB3Iwaiting]

Chinese EB3 applicants have already gone down this route with a very similar claim and lost. The case was L****ersus Kerry and spanned 2010 to 2013.

Here's the appeal judgement.

In the Silva v. Bell case, the federal government agreed with plaintiffs that “relief, in the form of a program to recapture and reissue the wrongfully issued visa numbers, is appropriate.” Visas were wrongfully issued in another category and court asked the agency to correct the mistake.

http://openjurist.org/605/f2d/978

In Silva, the court ordered the legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) to recapture immigrant visa numbers that were misallocated; the agency had erred by counting the set-aside immigrant visa numbers of Cuban refugees against the visa quota for all nationals of the Western Hemisphere between 1968 and 1976. Additionally, in Galvez, the court found that the aggrieved plaintiffs had been denied LPR status for which they were eligible and ordered the U.S. Secretary of State to issue visa numbers that would be charged against the remaining visa number allotment from the prior year. According to the Galvez court, the “INS has a statutory obligation to issue visas to qualified applicants to the full extent of the annual quota limits established by Congress.”

8 U.S.C. 1156 - Unused immigrant visas

"If an immigrant having an immigrant visa is denied admission to the United States and removed, or does not apply for admission before the expiration of the validity of his visa, or if an alien having an immigrant visa issued to him as a preference immigrant is found not to be a preference immigrant, an immigrant visa or a preference immigrant visa, as the case may be, may be issued in lieu thereof to another qualified alien."
Congress did not specify what would happen if a visa is wasted by the agency's inefficiency, probably because Congress did not expect any visas to go wasted, specially when there is enough demand. Therefore, agency inefficiency and apathy should not be allowed to defeat legislative intent. Unfortunately, that is exactly what happens.

[abcx13]

The whole idea of country quota is discriminatory. Challenge that as point #1.

#2 - It is such a shame for bright talented folks (or anybody) to be used as slaves in the American companies. H1B is slavery. GC backlogs facilitate slavery.

Backlogged candidates must understand that path to victory will go through failures. A lot of you have spent enough time that you should have learnt about American values of freedom and justice and the right to pursue happiness.

I agree with challenging the country quotas on the grounds that they are discriminatory. But I don't know if that would be a valid legal argument. Does anyone know? I've posted on multiple legal blogs asking the same question but no one has ever responded.

EDIT: Also, the decision reached in the Galvez case (which is now very old) contradicts the Kerry case as it pertains to recapture. In the Kerry case, the courts said that there is no authority by which USCIS can recapture visas. (Though maybe there is such authority with DoS?)

[qesehmk]

I agree with challenging the country quotas on the grounds that they are discriminatory. But I don't know if that would be a valid legal argument. Does anyone know? I've posted on multiple legal blogs asking the same question but no one has ever responded.

Sorry to state the obvious .. but nobody else is going to do it for you and other backlogged folks. This can not be a pass time activity. This will require serious commitment. My experience is that people tend to complain about backlogs and how their life is miserable etc but at the end of the day do not have the courage to do anything about it. That's why we have dumb organization asking donations and probably receiving it for making a show about advocacy. Advocacy is cosmetics if at all. Immigration is a much more strategic issue for DoS than you think. USCIS are just paper pushers. It's the DoS that has interest in keeping country quota not USCIS. DoS is not Evil. They have their legitimate objectives but the backlogged community must stand up and highlight the gross injustice. Anyway ... my last on this topic. I already got my GC long time back. I am just highlighting the need to do something beyond advocacy. Take my advice for what it's worth