EB2-3 Predictions (Rather Calculations) 2015-2020

[mesan123]

I totally second this. I have excellent experience with Senator John McCain in Arizona. Absolutely no harm in calling your senator or congressman. Just be polite and professional.

Yes following that route....Followed up again with our Local congressmen again....they mentioned they already contacted WH & DHS on this regard and waiting for their reply.... will keep following up

[tatikonda]

I am in Kansas, I know both Senators are anti-immigration crusaders. Do you think, its worth calling them.
I know one of them put an amendment to 2013 immigration reform bill which is now dead.

Yes following that route....Followed up again with our Local congressmen again....they mentioned they already contacted WH & DHS on this regard and waiting for their reply.... will keep following up

[gcq]

I am in Kansas, I know both Senators are anti-immigration crusaders. Do you think, its worth calling them.
I know one of them put an amendment to 2013 immigration reform bill which is now dead.

I would say there is no harm in trying at least once. Who knows a carefully posed argument may cause these lawmakers to change their mind. However I recommend doing it with lot of preparation ( taking help from **) so that you don't provide fodder for them against us.

[mesan123]

I am in Kansas, I know both Senators are anti-immigration crusaders. Do you think, its worth calling them.
I know one of them put an amendment to 2013 immigration reform bill which is now dead.

Yes please try ...no harm in trying....my personal view, you try to draft your own letter and your own story and incase other people are joining you let them have their own stories...it is better to handle that way....just my point of you....i feel no need to put any other organization names in our letter...you can mention about the steps taken...

that is what i Did...yes took some flowers along with me ( to give to the immigration Secretary ...don't know if it is right or wrong , definitely makes her remember me and pick up my calls and respond back )

[qesehmk]

that is what i Did...yes took some flowers along with me ( to give to the immigration Secretary ...don't know if it is right or wrong , definitely makes her remember me and pick up my calls and respond back )

Don't remember who said it ...
"A hammer may miss its aim. A bouquet never does."

[CleanSock]

Looks like the TRO has been denied.

[vishnu]

Skpanda - I missed this post... when you say nothing to worry, this would be regarding greg siskind's lawsuit or the visa bulletin in general going forward?

Guyz.. on the lawsuit front: There is lot of speculation going w.r.t crowdefend, govt response etc.

We had a conference call today with our lawyers. Although due to litigation policies, I am not allowed to disclose the points discussed in the conference call, I wanted to assure friends over here that there is nothing to worry.

We are happy to be where we are right now. We are channeling all our efforts and focus in the right direction. We are hoping for the best!

[cool_dude]

Is it a good idea to downgrade from EB2 India May 2011 to EB3? Seems like EB3 India will move quicker than EB2 going forward?

[YTeleven]

Is it a good idea to downgrade from EB2 India May 2011 to EB3? Seems like EB3 India will move quicker than EB2 going forward?

I don't think there is any advantage to downgrade to EB3-I for EB2-I FY11 applicants.
From FY12 onwards the applications are dense and the applicants will eventually end up in downgrading to EB3 in future.
To understand the situation here is some predictions:
-----------------------------------
Year----------Expected GC timeframe
FY09----------+7years i.e FY16
FY10----------+7years i.e.FY17
FY11----------+8years i.e FY18-FY19
FY12----------+9years i.e FY20-FY21
FY13-FY15-----+10-12years. i.e FY2025
------------------------------------

[Spectator]

From Oct Visa Bulletin. Did we have any comments on this topic earlier?

D. SCHEDULED EXPIRATION OF TWO EMPLOYMENT VISA
CATEGORIES.

Employment Fourth Preference Certain Religious Workers (SR): Pursuant to Section 3 of Public Law 112-176, the non-minister special immigrant program expires on September 30, 2015. No SR visas may be issued overseas, or final action taken on adjustment of status cases, after September 30, 2015. Visas issued prior to this date will only be issued with a validity date of September 30, 2015, and all individuals seeking admission as a non-minister special immigrant must be admitted (repeat, admitted) into the U.S. no later than midnight September 30, 2015..

Employment Fifth Preference Categories (I5 and R5): Section 1 of Public Law 112-176 extended this immigrant investor pilot program through September 30, 2015. The I5 and R5 visas may be issued until close of business on September 30, 2015, and may be issued for the full validity period. No I5 or R5 visas may be issued overseas, or final action taken on adjustment of status cases, after September 30, 2015..

The cut-off dates for the categories mentioned above have been listed as "Unavailable" for October. Congress is currently considering an extension of the SR, I5 and R5 visa categories, but there is no certainty when such legislative action may occur. If there is legislative action extending one or both of these categories for FY-2016, those cut-off dates would immediately become "Current" for October for all countries except China-mainland born I5 and R5 categories which would be subject to an October 8, 2013 cut-off date..

Not sure about EB4 but EB5 has been extended till December 11th.

http://www.murthy.com/2015/09/30/new...hrough-dec-11/

I haven't been able to find anything definitive about the part of EB4 that was due to sunset either.

Even if it has expired, the Non Minister Religious Worker part of EB4 would only provide a limited number of extra visas, although every bit counts.

In FY2014, usage in the EB4 subcategory made Unavailable in the October VB was 1,119 of the EB4 total of 8,287 and in FY2013 it was 831 of the 6,446 EB4 total. That's about 13% of total EB4 use.

[jimmys]

Hi Q and others,
Since the lawsuit relief is behind us, where do you see acceptance dates moving in FY 16? Will it cover complete 2009?

[qesehmk]

Skpanda should know it better. But my understanding is that the TRO i.e. temporary restraining order is denied. The lawsuit should still be in good standing and there should be a hearing.

Am I wrong skpanda?

Hi Q and others,
Since the lawsuit relief is behind us, where do you see acceptance dates moving in FY 16? Will it cover complete 2009?

[gcq]

For TRO to be succeed, there should be a compelling reason for a restraining. In this case it is not a serious issue, but can be resolved through regular lawsuit unless the lawsuit drags on beyond an year. -- my guess

[Jonty Rhodes]

Skpanda should know it better. But my understanding is that the TRO i.e. temporary restraining order is denied. The lawsuit should still be in good standing and there should be a hearing.

Am I wrong skpanda?

I am gonna take the liberty to answer that.

TRO has been denied. The lawsuit is still in good standing. But we don't know when the hearing is going to be. It could be days, weeks or months.

Also, personally I would like to read the verdict denying TRO and the comments that judge made denying TRO.

Here is one comment that I saw from the Judge.

"It appears the Revised Visa Bulletin did not in fact substantially alter or diminish the rights of Plaintiffs and potential class members, rather it clarified an erroneous prior statement of their rights. Immigrants cannot point to any law establishing that a Visa Bulletin can create a constitutional right to due process."

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/2990f...er-green-cards

So basically the judge is saying that the plaintiffs' rights were not diminished or altered with a revised bulletin but agencies just corrected a wrong date pertaining to their rights. Now, this statement was only made in reference to the motion of denial of TRO. The question that needs to be asked is whether it would have any negative impact on the actual lawsuit going forward.

We would have to see when both sides present their full arguments. TRO was a long shot to be honest and as far as I understand, it was more of a strategic move to make government respond quickly and to create more noise in media. If Greg and team would have gone for regular lawsuit without asking for TRO, Government would have taken their own sweet time to respond and everyone knows what that means. They could have asked time to study the case, time to prepare the response and God knows when they would have responded because they could have always asked for more time for more preparations. It would have been like that "Taarikh pe Taarikh" scenario without TRO request.

I would neither be optimistic nor pessimistic about this lawsuit. We just have to wait and watch how it unfolds.

[YTeleven]

Hi Q and others,
Since the lawsuit relief is behind us, where do you see acceptance dates moving in FY 16? Will it cover complete 2009?

Yes. CO believes till Q3FY09, but I believe the whole of FY09 will be cleared in FY16.

[qesehmk]

Hi Q and others,
Since the lawsuit relief is behind us, where do you see acceptance dates moving in FY 16? Will it cover complete 2009?

Based on the statements made by CO it seems they are viewing acceptance dates as dates that can possibly be cleared in next 12 months or so. Oct visa bulletin shows 1 Jul 09 as the acceptance dates for EB2I. Which means CO thinks that the maximum backlog that can be cleared by Oct 2016 for EB2I is upto 30 Jun 2009.

It is anybody's guess whether CO is being conservative or realistic.

[skpanda]

Skpanda should know it better. But my understanding is that the TRO i.e. temporary restraining order is denied. The lawsuit should still be in good standing and there should be a hearing.

Am I wrong skpanda?

Yes. TRO is denied. Lawsuit is very much there. There are lot of activities both in front and behind the scenes. We are continuing to channel our efforts to get an resolution to this issue as quickly as possible.

Objective right now is to get the Govt to provide their calculations that they used to come to the conclusion to revise the bulletin. Once they do that, it will be easy to show, how they have been rolling a dice every month for years to determine the cutoff dates.

Also, do not worry about TRO being denied. Same thing happened in July 2007 fiasco. Eventually common sense prevailed.

Satyamave Jayate (Only Truth Prevails)!!

[skpanda]

For TRO to be succeed, there should be a compelling reason for a restraining. In this case it is not a serious issue, but can be resolved through regular lawsuit unless the lawsuit drags on beyond an year. -- my guess

As mentioned in the judgement, the burden to prove irreparable harm is very high. In this case, even though there unfortunate monetary loss/stess etc, its not life and death situation. There are few families for whom it is life and death situation such as kids aging out etc. We are hoping that Government will provide them relief immediately (There is no assurance from anybody.. just a hope).

My personal situation is very serious and may have severe consequences to me and my family (if i do not file before Nov 2015).... but not sure if USCIS will consider that.

[skpanda]

Very well put!!

I am gonna take the liberty to answer that.

TRO has been denied. The lawsuit is still in good standing. But we don't know when the hearing is going to be. It could be days, weeks or months.

Also, personally I would like to read the verdict denying TRO and the comments that judge made denying TRO.

Here is one comment that I saw from the Judge.

"It appears the Revised Visa Bulletin did not in fact substantially alter or diminish the rights of Plaintiffs and potential class members, rather it clarified an erroneous prior statement of their rights. Immigrants cannot point to any law establishing that a Visa Bulletin can create a constitutional right to due process."

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/2990f...er-green-cards

So basically the judge is saying that the plaintiffs' rights were not diminished or altered with a revised bulletin but agencies just corrected a wrong date pertaining to their rights. Now, this statement was only made in reference to the motion of denial of TRO. The question that needs to be asked is whether it would have any negative impact on the actual lawsuit going forward.

We would have to see when both sides present their full arguments. TRO was a long shot to be honest and as far as I understand, it was more of a strategic move to make government respond quickly and to create more noise in media. If Greg and team would have gone for regular lawsuit without asking for TRO, Government would have taken their own sweet time to respond and everyone knows what that means. They could have asked time to study the case, time to prepare the response and God knows when they would have responded because they could have always asked for more time for more preparations. It would have been like that "Taarikh pe Taarikh" scenario without TRO request.

I would neither be optimistic nor pessimistic about this lawsuit. We just have to wait and watch how it unfolds.

[Spectator]

I haven't been able to find anything definitive about the part of EB4 that was due to sunset either.

Even if it has expired, the Non Minister Religious Worker part of EB4 would only provide a limited number of extra visas, although every bit counts.

In FY2014, usage in the EB4 subcategory made Unavailable in the October VB was 1,119 of the EB4 total of 8,287 and in FY2013 it was 831 of the 6,446 EB4 total. That's about 13% of total EB4 use.

From the November 2015 VB:

D. EXTENSION OF TWO EMPLOYMENT VISA CATEGORIES

An extension of both the Employment Fourth Preference Certain Religious Workers (SR) and Employment Fifth Preference Pilot (I5 and R5) Categories was signed into law in late September. As indicated in item D of the Visa Bulletin which announced the October cut-off dates, the extension has resulted in the immediate application of the following cut-off dates for the month of October:

SR: "Current" for all countries

I5 and R5: "Current" for all countries, except China-mainland born. China-mainland born applicants are subject to an October 8, 2013 cut-off date.

http://travel.state.gov/content/visa...mber-2015.html

[Spectator]

http://www.entrylaw.com/blog/go-ask-...r-dos-to-uscis

Go Ask Your Mother - DOS to USCIS

"Go ask your mother," is what Department of State has said to aspiring immigrants, referring them to USCIS to see whether the November visa bulletin will be honored or not. This is an embarassing slap in the face to the immigration agency, and exposes infighting and lack of communication between the two agencies responsible for managing the legal immigration process.

On Friday October 9, 2015, the State Department issued its November Visa Bulletin, the first after the October #Visagate2015 fiasco, and for the first time asked readers to look to the USCIS for answers as to whether the bulletin would be accepted. While the October visa bulletin stated, "USCIS has determined that this chart may be used...this month for filing applications for adjustment of status with USCIS," the November bulletin in contrast stated, "Visit http://www.uscis.gov/visabulletininfo for information on whether USCIS has determined that this chart can be used...this month for filing applications for adjustment of status with USCIS." By sending immigrants over to USCIS, they're essentially saying, "Go ask your mother!" Don't ask us whether it is ok or not, just ask USCIS.

USCIS, in turn, has not updated its website to indicate whether the November visa bulletin will be accepted. This is embarrassing. If it was intentional, it is embarrassing, and if it was negligent, it is embarrassing. How can our government operate in such a way, when the stakes are so high? When the two agencies which oversee the orderly immigration process have decided to stop talking and coordinating, what can we come to expect? Can we rely upon the representations made, or will we be left guessing? What is Secretary of State John Kerry saying about all this, or Leon Rodriquez, the USCIS head? One can only assume that the agencies have run amok, and are leaderless, scattered and divided. That does not bode well for immigrants, their families, and the employers who rely upon them for critical support.

[jimmys]

Thanks for all your comments.

I too hope FY 2016 clears FY 2009.

[qesehmk]

http://www.entrylaw.com/blog/go-ask-...r-dos-to-uscis

Spec - I always thought DoS is much more in tune with EB immigration while USCIS is almost anti-immigrant.

The whole idea of accepting 485 or not based on Visa Bulletin dates is purely a discretionary policy by USCIS that can be done away with in a heartbeat. It has no basis in any law as far as I know. Correct me if I am wrong.

So USCIS is a significant reason why all the backlogged candidates are in pain.

[kd2008]

I have said this before and repeat it again: Until the undocumented get their pound of flesh, legals will never get anything substantial in their favor from this administration. It has followed this line of thinking to the tee until now. I was surprised by the H-4 EAD regulation but that is also a weak relief and helps the H-1B lobby rather than GC community. Once the primaries for presidential election begin, this administration will wind down all efforts and stop rulemaking process for I-140 EAD etc, and everything will be politically sensitive we will be told. Nothing will get done. So stop the sending money to Greg nonsense and sending flowers to DHS nonsense. It is all a waste of time. The whole thing is rigged against us and we are pawned and played around for political gain. Keep your chin up, keep renewing your H-1, file labor again and again if needed and march on with your life.

[skpanda]

Has anybody noticed the below statement in VB? You can easily guess whats going on b/w DOS and USCIS. In India, children do that... its called 'katti'.

"Visit www.uscis.gov/visabulletininfo for information on whether USCIS has determined that this chart can be used (in lieu of the chart in paragraph 5.A.) this month for filing applications for adjustment of status with USCIS".

I am eagerly waiting for DOS/USCIS to release the numbers they use to determine cut off dates. I hope its not a dice that they throw for each category.

Edit: Never mind.. spec had already pointed this.