EB2-3 Predictions (Rather Calculations) 2015-2020

[Jagan01]

It is expected that the dates will advance in October as we enter the new fiscal year. EB-2 India is likely to advance to a date between February and April 2005.

There seems to be a typo.

[hope21]

There seems to be a typo.

Seems he wanted to say Feb to Apr 2009

[gcq]

There seems to be a typo.

For me that sounds like he was referring to Eb3-I. EB3-I is already in Dec 2004.

[hope21]

For me that sounds like he was referring to Eb3-I. EB3-I is already in Dec 2004.

Could be anything as it was a typo, let's wait and see, thanks.

[jimmys]

EB2-ROW demand seemed to be astronomically high in FY 15. Does anyone have any insight about EB2-ROW demand for FY 16? Will it be like FY 15 or FY 15 is just one time event?

[April2010]

I received the RFE mail today for my wife and my self. The RFE is about Medicals as they have expired, EVL, Proof of Legal presence in this country etc.,

[mechanical13]

I received the RFE mail today for my wife and my self. The RFE is about Medicals as they have expired, EVL, Proof of Legal presence in this country etc.,

Hi April2010 - is your priority date April 2010? Did you receive an RFE last year as well? Is your country of birth India/China?

If your PD is April 2010, then it really throws a wild card to all the predictions, because my understanding was that USCIS will only issue medical RFEs if they anticipate dates will become current in the next 12 months.

BUT..who knows, maybe there is a nexus between the doctors and USCIS to keep collecting medical test fees...

[April2010]

Hi April2010 - is your priority date April 2010? Did you receive an RFE last year as well? Is your country of birth India/China?

If your PD is April 2010, then it really throws a wild card to all the predictions, because my understanding was that USCIS will only issue medical RFEs if they anticipate dates will become current in the next 12 months.

BUT..who knows, maybe there is a nexus between the doctors and USCIS to keep collecting medical test fees...

Yes, my PD is April 2nd 2010 and I am EB2 India.

[hope21]

Hi April2010 - is your priority date April 2010? Did you receive an RFE last year as well? Is your country of birth India/China?

If your PD is April 2010, then it really throws a wild card to all the predictions, because my understanding was that USCIS will only issue medical RFEs if they anticipate dates will become current in the next 12 months.

BUT..who knows, maybe there is a nexus between the doctors and USCIS to keep collecting medical test fees...

This is what I predicted before Sep Bulletin
--------------------------------------------------
Long time follower. Very thankful to stalwarts/experts like Spec, Teddy, Q, Kanmani, YT and many more. Based on reading everyone's comments, my little knowledge/observation, here are my two cents:

For EB2I -
Sep Bulletin - Feb to Apr 2009
FY 16 - Feb to Apr 2010
FY 17 (First Quarter) - Inventory Build Up
--------------------------------------------------

Now that Sept Bulletin is gone. you never know it can still happen in next few months. So changing it to -

Oct to Dec 2015 - Feb to Apr 2009
End of FY '16 - Feb to Apr 2010

You never know miracles do happen, maybe this Apr 2010 Medical RFE is a sign towards that. Anyway, nobody has a crystal ball (neither us nor attorneys/lawyers), let's wait and see. Let's always be prepared for the WORST but always HOPE for the BEST, as you never KNOW.... Too philosophical for some of us, I guess .... :-)

[hope21]

bvsamrat,

That's true, but that movement has been possible because EB2-I has received large numbers of visas due to spillover.

That in turn was possible due to a series of beneficial factors: low EB5 usage in the early years, Kazarian's effect on EB1, beneficial changes in PERM processing times, large numbers of extra visas from FB, over allocation in FY2012 when EB2-WW had to be retrogressed etc.

Underlying those numbers, the situation wasn't as good as it appeared and this year none of those factors are present and EB2-WW has higher than normal demand.

I completely agree with all the factors you listed above Spec. Another important factor which contributed to this was change of strategy by CO. CO was using the time old strategy of forwarding the dates for 3/4 months from July to Sept/Oct and keeping it 'Unavailable/or 2004/2005' for the remainder of the year. In contrary to his this strategy (which he was using for the last 3/4 years), he kept the dates available/moving for the last 7/8 months from Jan ‘15to August '15 (I believe for priority dates 2006 to 2008).By using this strategy, he invited more Porting from EB3I to EB2I this year and in turn the repercussions were as we are seeing now - we could not touch last year's COD of 2009.

I know his intention was not bad as he wanted to streamline the system (which is not always easy), but at what expense? He forgot that he (or rather we all having PD >2009) will need to pay the price for this and hence the result - dates could not move beyond 2008. In my opinion, had he adopted the same old strategy - dates would have surely moved by at least 3/4 months from 1st May 2009 onwards.

Having said that, I know he wanted to streamline the system and wanted to get away from his old strategy in which he kept the dates Unavailable for longer duration – my only question is why now? why at the expense of 2009 PDers? Why he could not wait for an year or two later. The answer is then probably 2010/2011 PDers WILL ask the same question an year from now..... I would leave it at that.

[Spectator]

I completely agree with all the factors you listed above Spec. Another important factor which contributed to this was change of strategy by CO. CO was using the time old strategy of forwarding the dates for 3/4 months from July to Sept/Oct and keeping it 'Unavailable/or 2004/2005' for the remainder of the year. In contrary to his this strategy (which he was using for the last 3/4 years), he kept the dates available/moving for the last 7/8 months from Jan ‘15to August '15 (I believe for priority dates 2006 to 2008).By using this strategy, he invited more Porting from EB3I to EB2I this year and in turn the repercussions were as we are seeing now - we could not touch last year's COD of 2009.

I know his intention was not bad as he wanted to streamline the system (which is not always easy), but at what expense? He forgot that he (or rather we all having PD >2009) will need to pay the price for this and hence the result - dates could not move beyond 2008. In my opinion, had he adopted the same old strategy - dates would have surely moved by at least 3/4 months from 1st May 2009 onwards.

Having said that, I know he wanted to streamline the system and wanted to get away from his old strategy in which he kept the dates Unavailable for longer duration – my only question is why now? why at the expense of 2009 PDers? Why he could not wait for an year or two later. The answer is then probably 2010/2011 PDers WILL ask the same question an year from now..... I would leave it at that.

hope21,

It's refreshing to actually see a reply - I thought everybody had disappeared!

Unfortunately, that is the consequence of changes made without the addition of extra visa numbers. Those that benefit will be ecstatic and justify the change as the right thing to do. They won't bother to consider that their gain is at the expense of somebody else's pain.

The bigger problem for you is that the factors that previously allowed EB2-I advancement have disappeared before your case can be approved.

Here's a post I composed a few days ago, but never actually posted. It put's a bit more flesh on the subject of the underlying trend for EB2-I after stripping away the beneficial factors. I chose not to post it earlier, and only do so now with some hesitation, because it paints an altogether too bleak picture.

EB2-ROW demand seemed to be astronomically high in FY 15. Does anyone have any insight about EB2-ROW demand for FY 16? Will it be like FY 15 or FY 15 is just one time event?

jimmys,

You ask a simple question which I don't think has an equally simple answer.

You might consider first that in FY2014, demand was extremely low, rather than this year being "astronomically" high.

Over the 5 years FY2009-FY2013 the EB2-ROW average was 28.6k and that EB2-WW (non-IC) was 32.5k. The base allocations per year are 28.8k and 34.4k respectively. Compared to FY2013, when EB2-ROW received 36.5k and EB2-WW received 42.6k, this FY is not likely to be especially high, especially considering how low last FY was.

I think it too early to make a sensible judgement. It's better to wait until the October Inventory and Visa Statistics are published. Until then, I would consider what follows as wild (almost reckless) speculation - I urge people to read it as such. It's a classic case of GIGO.

FY2015 has seen a relatively slow rate of approvals initially followed by a spike in approvals later in the year.

That correlates fairly well to the ROW PERM certification pattern seen about 1 year earlier.

That pattern is not likely to repeat in FY2016 and it's more likely than not that the approvals per month will be somewhat smoother.

That is not the entire picture. DOL are on target to certify around 20% more PERM in FY2015 (75k) than they did in FY2014 (62.6k). While much of that can be attributed to India and China, it has still resulted in an increase in the average monthly certifications for ROW. It means that the two 12 month periods are likely to have fairly similar numbers of ROW PERM certifications. As an unconnected side note, despite the increased number of certifications, the number of pending PERM cases had still increased slightly at the end of Q3 FY2015 compared to the end of FY2014.

This may partly explain why the latest ROW Inventory did not fall as much as might have been expected.

I would stress that PERM certification numbers are only an indicator. It's quite likely that the EB2:EB3 ratio for ROW has shifted slightly towards EB3 and the time it takes for the conversion of a certified PERM to an approved I-485 is very sensitive to USCIS processing times. It's apparent that I-485 approvals don't entirely mirror PERM certifications and are relatively more "spiky".

A relatively high pending Inventory of EB2-ROW cases is not a positive indicator, but it's entirely possible that is caused because increasing USCIS processing times are allowing relatively more cases to show in the Inventory. The number of pending I-140s also continue to climb according to USCIS reports.

As far as numbers next FY, it would be better for this FY ROW numbers to be as high as possible to limit the number that fall through to next FY. That number is bounded somewhat by the news that EB2-I is likely to receive around 7.5k in FY2015. The extra 4.5k have to come from somewhere. The possibilities are EB2-WW (FA), EB1/EB4/EB5 (FD) or from some unknown source such as against the overall 7% limit for India (EB2-I has received more approvals in recent years than SO alone can account for).


In the 5 years from FY2009-FY2013, 3 of those years had extra FB visas and EB2-IC benefited to the tune of about 23k. In FY2011, when there were no extra FB visas, the one off Kazarian effect allowed EB2-IC to benefit by 14.8k. In FY2009, when neither event occurred, EB2-I received only 10.1k (almost all from EB5).

In past years, low EB5 approvals also contributed to large amounts of SO to EB2-IC. In the 5 years from FY2009-FY2013, EB5 contributed another 24k towards EB2-IC approvals.

Those 62k extra visas, represented 68% of the total extra visas received by EB2-IC between FY2009 and FY2013 (90k). EB2-I received 85% of the total extra visas.

To put it in perspective, during that same 5 year period, EB2-WW contributed just 9.7k extra visas and EB1 (excluding FY2011) actually used 0.3k more than their base allocation, with EB4 contributing an additional 8.3k.



Overall, EB2-I progress has been driven by spare FB visas, a one off event and low EB5 approvals, rather than FA within EB2 (or even FD from EB1 for that matter). Two of those factors (which accounted for over 40% of the extra visas over that period) are unlikely to happen again.

Nearly 2/3 of the extra visas that EB2-I are expected to receive in FY2015 can be directly attributed to the extra FB numbers.

For next FY, SO available to EB2-I will again likely rely heavily on extra numbers from FB being available to the total EB allocation.

If DOS also front loads approvals in the Consular Processing system which FB relies on, the chances of extra FB visas falling to EB will diminish.

We'll know the approximate number number of extra FB visas available to EB in FY2016 when the FY2015 Visa Statistics are published - hopefully around January 2016.


My "finger in the air" sense at the moment is that EB2-ROW may have less approvals next FY than this FY, but that the difference won't be as high as some people hope for. However, if EB2-WW approvals are pushed into next FY due to increased USCIS processing times, that advantage can evaporate.

At this point, I don't think anything is certain about what FY2016 will bring for EB2-I. I've learned over the years to expect the unexpected and that events can happen that were totally unexpected.

[amulchandra]

If DOS also front loads approvals in the Consular Processing system which FB relies on, the chances of extra FB visas falling to EB will diminish.

We'll know the approximate number number of extra FB visas available to EB in FY2016 when the FY2015 Visa Statistics are published - hopefully around January 2016.

Hi spec,

From your statement above, do you think the same thing will apply to EB3 India also? To the best of my knowledge fb numbers are equally divided among all the categories. So eb3 also should receive these extra FB numbers right?

[Spectator]

If DOS also front loads approvals in the Consular Processing system which FB relies on, the chances of extra FB visas falling to EB will diminish.

We'll know the approximate number number of extra FB visas available to EB in FY2016 when the FY2015 Visa Statistics are published - hopefully around January 2016.

Hi spec,

From your statement above, do you think the same thing will apply to EB3 India also? To the best of my knowledge fb numbers are equally divided among all the categories. So eb3 also should receive these extra FB numbers right?

amulchandra,

The extra FB visas are prorated in the same way as the initial allocation.

Therefore, EB3 will receive 28.6% of the total number of extra FB visas (286 per extra 1000). Those numbers are then prorated to the 7% limited Countries to increase the initial allocation (28.6% * 7% = 2% = 20 per extra 1000).

Any numbers not required by EB3-ROW will FA to the most retrogressed Country (almost certainly India).

This FY, the extra number was 4,796. This would increase the overall EB3 allocation by 1,372 from 40,040 to 41,412. China, India, Mexico and Philippines initial allocation would increase by 96 from 2,803 to 2,899. EB3-ROW would initially receive the remaining 988 extra visas.

[amulchandra]

amulchandra,

The extra FB visas are prorated in the same way as the initial allocation.

Therefore, EB3 will receive 28.6% of the total number of extra FB visas (286 per extra 1000). Those numbers are then prorated to the 7% limited Countries to increase the initial allocation (28.6% * 7% = 2% = 20 per extra 1000).

Any numbers not required by EB3-ROW will FA to the most retrogressed Country (almost certainly India).

This FY, the extra number was 4,796. This would increase the overall EB3 allocation by 1,372 from 40,040 to 41,412. China, India, Mexico and Philippines initial allocation would increase by 96 from 2,803 to 2,899. EB3-ROW would initially receive the remaining 988 extra visas.

Thank you very much Spec. Is it safe to say that the extra 988 visas from ROW will go to EB 3 I this FY?

Can you also provide your conservative estimate for EB3 I for FY 2016 when you find some time? This has been a veeeery long journey, way too longer than expected. I am getting kind of impatient now a days. I am not able to focus on the most important things because of this illogical/stupid GC process.

The predictions from this site provide a more realistic approach so that we can mentally prepare for what lies ahead.

I really appreciate your response.

Thank you very much
Amul

[suninphx]

hope21,

It's refreshing to actually see a reply - I thought everybody had disappeared!

Unfortunately, that is the consequence of changes made without the addition of extra visa numbers. Those that benefit will be ecstatic and justify the change as the right thing to do. They won't bother to consider that their gain is at the expense of somebody else's pain.

The bigger problem for you is that the factors that previously allowed EB2-I advancement have disappeared before your case can be approved.

Here's a post I composed a few days ago, but never actually posted. It put's a bit more flesh on the subject of the underlying trend for EB2-I after stripping away the beneficial factors. I chose not to post it earlier, and only do so now with some hesitation, because it paints an altogether too bleak picture.



jimmys,

You ask a simple question which I don't think has an equally simple answer.

You might consider first that in FY2014, demand was extremely low, rather than this year being "astronomically" high.

Over the 5 years FY2009-FY2013 the EB2-ROW average was 28.6k and that EB2-WW (non-IC) was 32.5k. The base allocations per year are 28.8k and 34.4k respectively. Compared to FY2013, when EB2-ROW received 36.5k and EB2-WW received 42.6k, this FY is not likely to be especially high, especially considering how low last FY was.

I think it too early to make a sensible judgement. It's better to wait until the October Inventory and Visa Statistics are published. Until then, I would consider what follows as wild (almost reckless) speculation - I urge people to read it as such. It's a classic case of GIGO.

FY2015 has seen a relatively slow rate of approvals initially followed by a spike in approvals later in the year.

That correlates fairly well to the ROW PERM certification pattern seen about 1 year earlier.

That pattern is not likely to repeat in FY2016 and it's more likely than not that the approvals per month will be somewhat smoother.

That is not the entire picture. DOL are on target to certify around 20% more PERM in FY2015 (75k) than they did in FY2014 (62.6k). While much of that can be attributed to India and China, it has still resulted in an increase in the average monthly certifications for ROW. It means that the two 12 month periods are likely to have fairly similar numbers of ROW PERM certifications. As an unconnected side note, despite the increased number of certifications, the number of pending PERM cases had still increased slightly at the end of Q3 FY2015 compared to the end of FY2014.

This may partly explain why the latest ROW Inventory did not fall as much as might have been expected.

I would stress that PERM certification numbers are only an indicator. It's quite likely that the EB2:EB3 ratio for ROW has shifted slightly towards EB3 and the time it takes for the conversion of a certified PERM to an approved I-485 is very sensitive to USCIS processing times. It's apparent that I-485 approvals don't entirely mirror PERM certifications and are relatively more "spiky".

A relatively high pending Inventory of EB2-ROW cases is not a positive indicator, but it's entirely possible that is caused because increasing USCIS processing times are allowing relatively more cases to show in the Inventory. The number of pending I-140s also continue to climb according to USCIS reports.

As far as numbers next FY, it would be better for this FY ROW numbers to be as high as possible to limit the number that fall through to next FY. That number is bounded somewhat by the news that EB2-I is likely to receive around 7.5k in FY2015. The extra 4.5k have to come from somewhere. The possibilities are EB2-WW (FA), EB1/EB4/EB5 (FD) or from some unknown source such as against the overall 7% limit for India (EB2-I has received more approvals in recent years than SO alone can account for).


In the 5 years from FY2009-FY2013, 3 of those years had extra FB visas and EB2-IC benefited to the tune of about 23k. In FY2011, when there were no extra FB visas, the one off Kazarian effect allowed EB2-IC to benefit by 14.8k. In FY2009, when neither event occurred, EB2-I received only 10.1k (almost all from EB5).

In past years, low EB5 approvals also contributed to large amounts of SO to EB2-IC. In the 5 years from FY2009-FY2013, EB5 contributed another 24k towards EB2-IC approvals.

Those 62k extra visas, represented 68% of the total extra visas received by EB2-IC between FY2009 and FY2013 (90k). EB2-I received 85% of the total extra visas.

To put it in perspective, during that same 5 year period, EB2-WW contributed just 9.7k extra visas and EB1 (excluding FY2011) actually used 0.3k more than their base allocation, with EB4 contributing an additional 8.3k.



Overall, EB2-I progress has been driven by spare FB visas, a one off event and low EB5 approvals, rather than FA within EB2 (or even FD from EB1 for that matter). Two of those factors (which accounted for over 40% of the extra visas over that period) are unlikely to happen again.

Nearly 2/3 of the extra visas that EB2-I are expected to receive in FY2015 can be directly attributed to the extra FB numbers.

For next FY, SO available to EB2-I will again likely rely heavily on extra numbers from FB being available to the total EB allocation.

If DOS also front loads approvals in the Consular Processing system which FB relies on, the chances of extra FB visas falling to EB will diminish.

We'll know the approximate number number of extra FB visas available to EB in FY2016 when the FY2015 Visa Statistics are published - hopefully around January 2016.


My "finger in the air" sense at the moment is that EB2-ROW may have less approvals next FY than this FY, but that the difference won't be as high as some people hope for. However, if EB2-WW approvals are pushed into next FY due to increased USCIS processing times, that advantage can evaporate.

At this point, I don't think anything is certain about what FY2016 will bring for EB2-I. I've learned over the years to expect the unexpected and that events can happen that were totally unexpected.

Spec- as usual, very detailed reply and outstanding analysis.

Thank you!

[hope21]

hope21,

It's refreshing to actually see a reply - I thought everybody had disappeared!

Unfortunately, that is the consequence of changes made without the addition of extra visa numbers. Those that benefit will be ecstatic and justify the change as the right thing to do. They won't bother to consider that their gain is at the expense of somebody else's pain.

The bigger problem for you is that the factors that previously allowed EB2-I advancement have disappeared before your case can be approved.

Here's a post I composed a few days ago, but never actually posted. It put's a bit more flesh on the subject of the underlying trend for EB2-I after stripping away the beneficial factors. I chose not to post it earlier, and only do so now with some hesitation, because it paints an altogether too bleak picture.



jimmys,

You ask a simple question which I don't think has an equally simple answer.

You might consider first that in FY2014, demand was extremely low, rather than this year being "astronomically" high.

Over the 5 years FY2009-FY2013 the EB2-ROW average was 28.6k and that EB2-WW (non-IC) was 32.5k. The base allocations per year are 28.8k and 34.4k respectively. Compared to FY2013, when EB2-ROW received 36.5k and EB2-WW received 42.6k, this FY is not likely to be especially high, especially considering how low last FY was.

I think it too early to make a sensible judgement. It's better to wait until the October Inventory and Visa Statistics are published. Until then, I would consider what follows as wild (almost reckless) speculation - I urge people to read it as such. It's a classic case of GIGO.

FY2015 has seen a relatively slow rate of approvals initially followed by a spike in approvals later in the year.

That correlates fairly well to the ROW PERM certification pattern seen about 1 year earlier.

That pattern is not likely to repeat in FY2016 and it's more likely than not that the approvals per month will be somewhat smoother.

That is not the entire picture. DOL are on target to certify around 20% more PERM in FY2015 (75k) than they did in FY2014 (62.6k). While much of that can be attributed to India and China, it has still resulted in an increase in the average monthly certifications for ROW. It means that the two 12 month periods are likely to have fairly similar numbers of ROW PERM certifications. As an unconnected side note, despite the increased number of certifications, the number of pending PERM cases had still increased slightly at the end of Q3 FY2015 compared to the end of FY2014.

This may partly explain why the latest ROW Inventory did not fall as much as might have been expected.

I would stress that PERM certification numbers are only an indicator. It's quite likely that the EB2:EB3 ratio for ROW has shifted slightly towards EB3 and the time it takes for the conversion of a certified PERM to an approved I-485 is very sensitive to USCIS processing times. It's apparent that I-485 approvals don't entirely mirror PERM certifications and are relatively more "spiky".

A relatively high pending Inventory of EB2-ROW cases is not a positive indicator, but it's entirely possible that is caused because increasing USCIS processing times are allowing relatively more cases to show in the Inventory. The number of pending I-140s also continue to climb according to USCIS reports.

As far as numbers next FY, it would be better for this FY ROW numbers to be as high as possible to limit the number that fall through to next FY. That number is bounded somewhat by the news that EB2-I is likely to receive around 7.5k in FY2015. The extra 4.5k have to come from somewhere. The possibilities are EB2-WW (FA), EB1/EB4/EB5 (FD) or from some unknown source such as against the overall 7% limit for India (EB2-I has received more approvals in recent years than SO alone can account for).


In the 5 years from FY2009-FY2013, 3 of those years had extra FB visas and EB2-IC benefited to the tune of about 23k. In FY2011, when there were no extra FB visas, the one off Kazarian effect allowed EB2-IC to benefit by 14.8k. In FY2009, when neither event occurred, EB2-I received only 10.1k (almost all from EB5).

In past years, low EB5 approvals also contributed to large amounts of SO to EB2-IC. In the 5 years from FY2009-FY2013, EB5 contributed another 24k towards EB2-IC approvals.

Those 62k extra visas, represented 68% of the total extra visas received by EB2-IC between FY2009 and FY2013 (90k). EB2-I received 85% of the total extra visas.

To put it in perspective, during that same 5 year period, EB2-WW contributed just 9.7k extra visas and EB1 (excluding FY2011) actually used 0.3k more than their base allocation, with EB4 contributing an additional 8.3k.



Overall, EB2-I progress has been driven by spare FB visas, a one off event and low EB5 approvals, rather than FA within EB2 (or even FD from EB1 for that matter). Two of those factors (which accounted for over 40% of the extra visas over that period) are unlikely to happen again.

Nearly 2/3 of the extra visas that EB2-I are expected to receive in FY2015 can be directly attributed to the extra FB numbers.

For next FY, SO available to EB2-I will again likely rely heavily on extra numbers from FB being available to the total EB allocation.

If DOS also front loads approvals in the Consular Processing system which FB relies on, the chances of extra FB visas falling to EB will diminish.

We'll know the approximate number number of extra FB visas available to EB in FY2016 when the FY2015 Visa Statistics are published - hopefully around January 2016.


My "finger in the air" sense at the moment is that EB2-ROW may have less approvals next FY than this FY, but that the difference won't be as high as some people hope for. However, if EB2-WW approvals are pushed into next FY due to increased USCIS processing times, that advantage can evaporate.

At this point, I don't think anything is certain about what FY2016 will bring for EB2-I. I've learned over the years to expect the unexpected and that events can happen that were totally unexpected.

Thanks Spec, I can't agree with you more on this. I particularly liked the sentence/verbiage - 'Their gain is at the expense of somebody else's pain'. My only comment is - Before changing his(CO) strategy - A thorough analysis should have been done by him/his team specially for this year, to avoid this kind of scenario as basically everything went against EB2I this year, specifically when he knew other beneficial factors were not that great for this year. Having said that, I don't think harping on the past will help anyone/us, let bygones be bygones and move forward.

Thanks for the detailed analysis that you posted, as always - Great ! On top of your great analysis, Somehow I feel that worst is over for EB2I (this FY year '15), and have a good feeling for this coming FY '16 and I think it should/will not be as bad as FY 15 for sure, let's wait and see..

[iatiam]

All,

I have a question about job loss while working on EAD. I am working in the energy industry on an EAD and the way things are going with oil prices, there are chances that my job might be lost. I don't anticipate getting any thing for at least 6 months. The question is,
1. How does it affect my GC?
2. Is there a rule some where which states that it is OK to lose job while on an EAD?

I do realize that this isn't the right place for such a question; just posted for better visibility. So admins, please move it after it has generated some answers.

Iatiam

[gcq]

All,

I have a question about job loss while working on EAD. I am working in the energy industry on an EAD and the way things are going with oil prices, there are chances that my job might be lost. I don't anticipate getting any thing for at least 6 months. The question is,
1. How does it affect my GC?
2. Is there a rule some where which states that it is OK to lose job while on an EAD?

I do realize that this isn't the right place for such a question; just posted for better visibility. So admins, please move it after it has generated some answers.

Iatiam

Greencard is for future job. There is no requirement that you should be working while waiting for GC. The only requirement is
1. you should not be out of status ( Pending I-485 gives you status)
2. You should not work without EAD or other work authorizations

However if USCIS issues an RFE for EVL, you should have a job offer letter in same/similar category.

[Spectator]

I don't usually post items like this, but I think it is interesting enough to do so.

I put it firmly in the "unsubstantiated rumour" bucket.

I saw this posting on Trackitt http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussi...an-2015/page/7 about his I-485 pending under EB1B.

mgsgcto

to sandiegosoul:

I got following reply for my SR. This is quite different from the response that many have shared on this forum. It is not about background checks. What does this indicate?

"USCIS is aware that according to the Department of State Visa Bulletin, there appear to be visas available however there has been an extremely large volume of cases requiring visas. A visa may or may not be currently available, however if there is a visa available for the case, those cases are being assigned to officers and are being processed in date order. If you do not receive a decision or other notice of action from us within 90 days of the date of this letter you may place another inquiry after that period of time has elapsed. You may find further information about visas on the Department of State website at www.travel.state.gov."

It's interesting that the person has quoted the USCIS reply and that it appears USCIS are already concerned about EB1 visas being exhausted at some point before the end of the FY.

That would be quite troubling, since it would imply that EB1 might not only use their own allocation, but also any spare visas from EB4.

In turn, that would mean EB1 could not contribute any FD to EB2.

It doesn't seem feasible for EB2-I to reach 7.5k visas without some contribution from EB1, given what we suspect about EB2-WW demand and what is already known about EB5 demand.

If EB1 does in fact run out of visas, EB2-IC are likely to be internally made Unavailable for the rest of the FY. Depending on how many approvals have already been made under EB2-IC, it might also mean that insufficient visas remain for the EB2-WW demand and cases will be shifted to a FY2016 approval.

The fact that the number of visas left in EB1/EB2 is being discussed this early suggests CO has done a pretty good job in ensuring no wastage in those categories.

It's a shame CO didn't move EB3-I a month earlier - I think most of the approvals in September will be from EB3. USCIS should have ample capacity to deal with those if there are relatively few visas left in the other EB Categories.

I would stress again that this is almost certainly overreaching based on a single Trackitt post.

[ROCK72]

Maybe this is another proof of that happening....

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

[suninphx]

I don't usually post items like this, but I think it is interesting enough to do so.

I put it firmly in the "unsubstantiated rumour" bucket.

I saw this posting on Trackitt http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussi...an-2015/page/7 about his I-485 pending under EB1B.



It's interesting that the person has quoted the USCIS reply and that it appears USCIS are already concerned about EB1 visas being exhausted at some point before the end of the FY.

That would be quite troubling, since it would imply that EB1 might not only use their own allocation, but also any spare visas from EB4.

In turn, that would mean EB1 could not contribute any FD to EB2.

It doesn't seem feasible for EB2-I to reach 7.5k visas without some contribution from EB1, given what we suspect about EB2-WW demand and what is already known about EB5 demand.

If EB1 does in fact run out of visas, EB2-IC are likely to be internally made Unavailable for the rest of the FY. Depending on how many approvals have already been made under EB2-IC, it might also mean that insufficient visas remain for the EB2-WW demand and cases will be shifted to a FY2016 approval.

The fact that the number of visas left in EB1/EB2 is being discussed this early suggests CO has done a pretty good job in ensuring no wastage in those categories.

It's a shame CO didn't move EB3-I a month earlier - I think most of the approvals in September will be from EB3. USCIS should have ample capacity to deal with those if there are relatively few visas left in the other EB Categories.

I would stress again that this is almost certainly overreaching based on a single Trackitt post.

So much for a single trackitt post. I hope someday Spec will find out some positive news about EB2I

[migo79]

Spec:
Thanks for sharing, I think CO pointed the aggressive use of EB1 in his latest communication with AILA so i assume the trackitt post is correct.

sunni
I'm always an optimistic man but honestly i don't see any glimmer of hope in sight for EB2I ((, The high consumption of other preference categories essentially killed any hope of EB2I progress.
This will always be the case i'm afraid unless the demand for the other categories fall and more visa can be pushed toward EB2I.

For EB3I it is a different story i believe because of the relatively low demand from WW, EB3I *should* have a good FY16. YTeleven has made a good chart here .

The situation in EBI is quite fragile as any downgrade from EB2I to EB3I could just jeopardize both categories, i don't think this will be an immediate problems since currently Eb3I only reached July 2007 and EB2I already passed that but if any inventory build up will happen for EB3I it will be very interesting to see how this will develop, it will be like this in my opinion:

Very High EB2I demand
High EB2WW demand
Low EB3I demand (post 2007)
Low/Modest EB3WW demand.

Thanks.

[Spectator]

So much for a single trackitt post. I hope someday Spec will find out some positive news about EB2I

suninphx,

I think that is a fair enough comment.

I tried to add sufficient warnings about the speculative nature of the post.

At least it stimulated some conversation I admit I did post it a bit to get a reaction. Maybe that was a bit naughty.

Personally, I don't see it happening at all, which makes the USCIS reply very odd.

I meant to say thanks for your previous positive comment - coming from you, it meant a lot.

[suninphx]

suninphx,

I think that is a fair enough comment.

I tried to add sufficient warnings about the speculative nature of the post.

At least it stimulated some conversation I admit I did post it a bit to get a reaction. Maybe that was a bit naughty.

Personally, I don't see it happening at all, which makes the USCIS reply very odd.

I meant to say thanks for your previous positive comment - coming from you, it meant a lot.

Spec,



I guess I have started showing signs of little bit frustration(ok never mind ..lot of it actually) lately, specially after this very disappointing year.

I always had hunch that when you post such news about EB2I you are having a good laugh at your desk ...and today that came true ...:d

Please continue giving practical data and comments...and I will continue to be hopeful reminding myself there is always next year

[suninphx]

Spec:
Thanks for sharing, I think CO pointed the aggressive use of EB1 in his latest communication with AILA so i assume the trackitt post is correct.

sunni
I'm always an optimistic man but honestly i don't see any glimmer of hope in sight for EB2I ((, The high consumption of other preference categories essentially killed any hope of EB2I progress.
This will always be the case i'm afraid unless the demand for the other categories fall and more visa can be pushed toward EB2I.

For EB3I it is a different story i believe because of the relatively low demand from WW, EB3I *should* have a good FY16. YTeleven has made a good chart here .

The situation in EBI is quite fragile as any downgrade from EB2I to EB3I could just jeopardize both categories, i don't think this will be an immediate problems since currently Eb3I only reached July 2007 and EB2I already passed that but if any inventory build up will happen for EB3I it will be very interesting to see how this will develop, it will be like this in my opinion:

Very High EB2I demand
High EB2WW demand
Low EB3I demand (post 2007)
Low/Modest EB3WW demand.

Thanks.

Yes- EB3I are expected to have great FY'16 and I would be personally very happy if that happens.