EB3 Predictions & Calculations

[qesehmk]

Oh ok .... now i get the situation - you haven't even filed 485.

If I were you - I wouldn't worry a thing. Enjoy the wedding ... come back and then file 485.

If I am lucky and date become current - I will file early. IMHO (but don't hold me to this please) EB3ROW dates are not going to retrogress. So it's ok to wait a few months after everybody is in US and then file 485.

I am EB3 ROW. I don't think EB2I dates will move to 2009, what I am reading it will be early mid 2008 at the best. For EB3 ROW is demand build operation that happened to EB2I last fiscal year.



EB3ROW - January 2009 was never current. Thanks




If I file early July probably I will not get my AP in time so I will need to travel on H1B....so you say that is a NO, NO?
My other option is file for I485 without the EAD and AP. And apply for EAD & AP just after I come back from travel with H1B?

P.S. Thanks once again about your response. Thanks to your effort of putting this website together and many gurus efforts I am small EB3ROW guru between my local EB3 friends )

P.S.1 Spec I am refreshing every other second waiting for the master guru response Thank You!

[Spectator]

Spec, Q and other gurus

When EB2I reached July 2007 in October 2011 CO took the followings steps:

November 2011 - 01Nov2007 - 4 months movement - demand data 1,600
December 2011 - 15Mar2008 - 4.5 months movement - demand data 150
January 2012 - 01Jan2009 - 9.5 months movement - demand data not released
February 2012 - 01Jan2010 - 12 months movement - demand data 102
March 2012 - 01May2010 - 4 months movement - demand data 55
April 2012 - 01May2010 - 0 months movement - demand data 20
May 2012 - 15Aug2017 - 33 months retrogression - demand data not released
June 2012 - U - NA - demand data 12,650

When EB3 ROW got close to July 2007 in April 2013 CO took the following steps:
May 2013 - 01Dec2007 - 6 months movement - demand data around 1,700
June 2013 - 01 Sep2008 - 9 months movement - demand data around 450
July 2013 - ######### - ? months movement
August 2013 - ######### - ? months movement


Base on this numbers its looks like it took a couple of goods months to the documentary qualified reach and pass the monthly allocation in EB2I case. (and EB2C)
However I understand that this 2 are two different stories. EB2IC had a lot of spillover/fall down that kicked in from EB4, EB5, EB1 and EB2ROW.
In EBROW case is just the monthly allocation of 3,163 so probably they will reach and pass the monthly allocation limit much sooner not like EB2IC last year.
I would think (and hope) that EB3 ROW will move forward in July and stop in August and retrogress maybe in September 2013.
What you think the chance is the above will be true?

Is a big chance that I will be current in July VB (PD Jan 2009). My wife and daughter are back in my home country visiting the family and I was planning to join them for my sister wedding in August and come back in mid August.
What would you do if you would be in my situation?
1. Cancel everything and fly the family back and file for I-485.
2. Risk it and hope August will be current also
3. (the most expensive) Fly back the family in July, file for I-485 (+ EAD and AP) and go back in August. However I am not sure how would the travel outside of country affect the I485 (EAD + AP) application...etc.

I appreciate your time reading the above, any response will be appreciated.

Thank You

isantem,

I honestly hesitate to answer.

I agree you are likely to become Current in July. Unfortunately, I also agree that dates might retrogress not later than September if USCIS process cases with the speed they did last year. Equally, there is some chance the dates won't retrogress until October.

What you do depends on your risk tolerance and how important it is to you and your family to file the I-485 application and how you could handle missing the boat in the worst case versus missing a very important family event.

Since it is such an important decision, I cannot suggest what you should do.

I can outline where I think EB3-ROW (no C&M) stands at the moment (but it is subject to error).

As of now, there are very few remaining cases that can be approved. Further approvals now mainly rely on AOS cases submitted from May 01, 2013 being adjudicated and approved as well as Consular Processed cases.

Even if an AOS case was received on May 01, 2013 and was adjudicated by USCIS in 3 months flat, then the earliest approval would be on August 01, 2013. It doesn't seem as if CO will see the new AOS demand until August at the earliest. He has to set the August VB in early July, when new AOS demand will not be apparent. That makes it less likely that he would retrogress the dates in the August VB.

Currently, I would estimate EB3-ROW to have used about 17.5k visas - EB3-ROW might have 27k available for the year, so 9.5k approvals might be necessary from new filers and CP.

Even though theoretically, EB3-ROW have a larger allocation, in reality EB3-P use some and EB3-ROW is the whipping boy for unused visas. Last year, EB3-ROW received 23,691 visas when the theoretical allocation was 29,848. The pattern is similar for previous years.

If CP represented 20%, then maybe as many as 5k CP cases could be approved from the COD movement to date, if the Consulates can handle the load. My gut feel is that the dates will not retrogress in August, but there remains the possibility that CO may be ultra cautious after leaving the EB2-IC PD too late for too long last year. Any retrogression could not be based on apparent demand - it would be gut feel. I can't double guess him.

Without knowing the demand that the movement will generate, it is difficult to say how long it would be before an Jan 2009 PD might become Current again, once it retrogresses - maybe a year or so.

As I said, it depends on your priorities, how important filing I-485 is to you and your family and whether you are prepared to accept any of risk missing out until the PD becomes current again.

You should know about the August VB dates about July 10, 2013. I don't know whether your circumstances allow you to wait until then to make a decision. It's also possible that the July VB may give some guidance or that some information will come out of the AILA Conference towards the end of June.

I wish you the very best of luck.

[isantem]

I honestly hesitate to answer.

Thank you very much for the time you spent to provide the response. You pointed out very well all the points that can influence what could happen and yes at the end is my decision and how important is for me the EAD and AP. I have a job that I like so I am not looking to change the jobs at all and my wife will be in school for another 1.5 years and we have the H1B/H4 until 2016 so I think I will risk it.

[isantem]

I needed just 9 more days
And it looks like it will not be any more move for EB3ROW this FY.
Why is so hard for him to move the dates ahead and let people to enjoy the "freedom" of EAD and AP. If the demand data is below the monthly limit he should move the dates and is covered by law and also it will make people happy. That is what he did last year why he can't do it now? Anyhow...back to work and struggle another year or two.

[shane.kelly55]

My Priority Date for my EB3 ROW is 02/09/2009 and according to the trends I might actually be current as of July next month.

Does this seem possible? Any chance i might be delayed? How much longer after i become current?

I'm totally stoked with the progress they are making this year.

[Spectator]

My Priority Date for my EB3 ROW is 02/09/2009 and according to the trends I might actually be current as of July next month.

Does this seem possible? Any chance i might be delayed? How much longer after i become current?

I'm totally stoked with the progress they are making this year.

shane.kelly55,

If I understand your PD correctly, it seems you will miss out on the current movement.

The Cut Off Date in July for EB3-ROW will be 01JAN09 i.e. it covers all PD up to December 31, 2008.

Unfortunately, the VB also says

D. VISA AVAILABILITY IN THE COMING MONTHS (August - October)

Employment Third:

Worldwide: No additional movement. This cut-off date has advanced 18 months during the past three months. Such rapid movement can be expected to generate a significant amount of new demand, with the impact not being felt for three to five months. Therefore, the cut-off date will be held until it can be determined what level of demand is to be expected, and whether it is likely to be sustained.

That is a very strong hint that the Cut Off Date will not advance further than 01JAN09. With a PD of February 9, 2009 you would need a Cut Off Date of 15FEB09 to be Current.

I think it is very disappointing that it looks like it will not advance further.

The Cut Off Date for EB3-ROW is likely to retrogress to late 2007 at the beginning of the next FY beginning on October 1, 2013 or shortly thereafter. It may take a further 12-18 months to reach your PD, depending on how much demand is generated by the current advancement in the Cut Off Dates.

Best of luck and please correct me if I have misinterpreted your situation.

[mar2603]

Any idea how far EB3 will retrogress next VB?

[mar2603]

Hi all,

I'm new to this forum and I just want to know any insight or thought or prediction.

When EB3 ROW PD is being moved to JAN 09, the DOS actually said there is not enough demand or the demand is not that strong.

They moved it again to July 2010. Everyone seems on one agreement that the date will retrogress.

Anyone could enlighten me how far it will retrogress?


Thanks,
Mar2603

[Spectator]

Hi all,

I'm new to this forum and I just want to know any insight or thought or prediction.

When EB3 ROW PD is being moved to JAN 09, the DOS actually said there is not enough demand or the demand is not that strong.

They moved it again to July 2010. Everyone seems on one agreement that the date will retrogress.

Anyone could enlighten me how far it will retrogress?


Thanks,
Mar2603

Mar2603,

Without any figures at all for new cases submitted by EB3-ROW, that is a very difficult question to answer.

Had the July 2007 Inventory not run out, it is likely that EB3-ROW would have reached Late 2007 or Early 2008 in FY2013.

It is likely that dates will retrogress to something around those dates when the Demand starts to show up to DOS. After that, the dates should move forward at the normal 4-6 weeks per month, depending on the actual numbers. That could stretch to 8 weeks per month if the number of new applications is actually very low.

As was evident last year with EB2-I, DOS not seeing the Demand is not the same as USCIS not receiving large numbers of new I-485 applications. Last year, DOS also reported seeing low Demand for EB2-I, but a huge number of cases had actually been filed with USCIS, as was subsequently seen in the USCIS Inventory and DOS Demand Data.

As I have said previously, it was surprising to me that CO held dates at 01JAN09. At the normal rate that EB3-ROW move forward, that would not cover much more than Demand to the end of FY2014.

If Demand is actually a bit lower, it might not have even lasted that long.

The latest movement of dates is where CO should have moved them in the first place IMO.

After 2008 PD. I do have some hope that the numbers will drop appreciably. Now the dates have been moved forward into 2010, eventually we shall find out as the cases are pre-adjudicated. Don't expect the true numbers to appear in the USCIS Inventory if it is published for October. There seems to be a delay of 6-8 weeks to properly show numbers in it. It will take many months for the numbers to show in the Demand Data and only after dates have retrogressed.

Sorry i can't give you a better answer.

[mar2603]

Mar2603,

Without any figures at all for new cases submitted by EB3-ROW, that is a very difficult question to answer.

Had the July 2007 Inventory not run out, it is likely that EB3-ROW would have reached Late 2007 or Early 2008 in FY2013.

It is likely that dates will retrogress to something around those dates when the Demand starts to show up to DOS. After that, the dates should move forward at the normal 4-6 weeks per month, depending on the actual numbers. That could stretch to 8 weeks per month if the number of new applications is actually very low.

As was evident last year with EB2-I, DOS not seeing the Demand is not the same as USCIS not receiving large numbers of new I-485 applications. Last year, DOS also reported seeing low Demand for EB2-I, but a huge number of cases had actually been filed with USCIS, as was subsequently seen in the USCIS Inventory and DOS Demand Data.

As I have said previously, it was surprising to me that CO held dates at 01JAN09. At the normal rate that EB3-ROW move forward, that would not cover much more than Demand to the end of FY2014.

If Demand is actually a bit lower, it might not have even lasted that long.

The latest movement of dates is where CO should have moved them in the first place IMO.

After 2008 PD. I do have some hope that the numbers will drop appreciably. Now the dates have been moved forward into 2010, eventually we shall find out as the cases are pre-adjudicated. Don't expect the true numbers to appear in the USCIS Inventory if it is published for October. There seems to be a delay of 6-8 weeks to properly show numbers in it. It will take many months for the numbers to show in the Demand Data and only after dates have retrogressed.

Sorry i can't give you a better answer.

Hi there,

Thanks a lot for your reply. I really appreciate this. Ok some clarification"

"The latest movement of dates is where CO should have moved them in the first place IMO." - you mean they don't have to move it to Jan 2009 first, instead straight to July 2010 right?

"After 2008 PD. I do have some hope that the numbers will drop appreciably" - This is actually true. In Trackit, there are some people posting PERM data and it seems that until mid 2011, PERM is not that bad plus a lot of people lost job, economy is down and so on.

"There seems to be a delay of 6-8 weeks to properly show numbers in it." - I do agree with this. My main point is, is this July 2013 demand data actually accurate?? If so then when it retrogress, is there any chance that it moved to Jan 2009? Since this is the basis that the CO moved the dates to July 2010.


Thanks,
Mar2603

[Spectator]

Hi there,

Thanks a lot for your reply. I really appreciate this. Ok some clarification"

"The latest movement of dates is where CO should have moved them in the first place IMO." - you mean they don't have to move it to Jan 2009 first, instead straight to July 2010 right?

"After 2008 PD. I do have some hope that the numbers will drop appreciably" - This is actually true. In Trackit, there are some people posting PERM data and it seems that until mid 2011, PERM is not that bad plus a lot of people lost job, economy is down and so on.

"There seems to be a delay of 6-8 weeks to properly show numbers in it." - I do agree with this. My main point is, is this July 2013 demand data actually accurate?? If so then when it retrogress, is there any chance that it moved to Jan 2009? Since this is the basis that the CO moved the dates to July 2010.


Thanks,
Mar2603

Mar2603,

Back in January, I wrote a post about how I thought CO should move the Cut Off Dates for EB3-ROW as the Inventory became exhausted. You can find it here. In the post, I explain why and the consequences of not doing so. We are now seeing the possibility of some of those consequences becoming true.

"The latest movement of dates is where CO should have moved them in the first place IMO." - you mean they don't have to move it to Jan 2009 first, instead straight to July 2010 right?

I mean CO should have at least continued to move the Cut Off Dates, rather than stopping at 01JAN09.

I do think the early movement was too slow and he should have reached the end of 2008 at least a month earlier.

"After 2008 PD. I do have some hope that the numbers will drop appreciably" - This is actually true. In Trackit, there are some people posting PERM data and it seems that until mid 2011, PERM is not that bad plus a lot of people lost job, economy is down and so on.

I agree with that. If you consider that the ratio of EB2:EB3 PERM has swung heavily towards EB2, the EB3 numbers must have dropped significantly, regardless of the lower PERM numbers.

"There seems to be a delay of 6-8 weeks to properly show numbers in it." - I do agree with this. My main point is, is this July 2013 demand data actually accurate?? If so then when it retrogress, is there any chance that it moved to Jan 2009? Since this is the basis that the CO moved the dates to July 2010.

I believe the last published DOS Demand Data it is an accurate representation of the Demand that DOS can see. DOS cannot "see" cases that USCIS have not adjudicated.

The 6-8 weeks comment was for the numbers to appear even in USCIS own Inventory Report. DOS won't see the Demand for 3-6 months, depending how fast USCIS process the cases.

I think the recently published USCIS July Inventory reflects only a small fraction of the cases actually submitted to that date by EB3-ROW. Judging by EB2-IC last year, it will take several months to properly reflect the numbers. The earliest USCIS Invenry I would even remotely trust would be in May 2014.

The retrogression question is more tricky and subjective.

By the time October starts, the oldest "new" cases from May 2013 will be 5 months old. Even July 2013 cases will be 4 months old by the end of October. There has to be a high chance that USCIS will adjudicate many of those cases through October. That will be Demand against the 2.6k that EB3-ROW may have available for October 2013. With that in mind, there is a high likelihood, if CO takes that possibility into consideration, that EB3-ROW will retrogress in October back into 2008.

[eb2visa]

USCIS Service Center EB-485 Processing Volume Update up to June 2013 are released

[mar2603]

Mar2603,

Back in January, I wrote a post about how I thought CO should move the Cut Off Dates for EB3-ROW as the Inventory became exhausted. You can find it here. In the post, I explain why and the consequences of not doing so. We are now seeing the possibility of some of those consequences becoming true.


I mean CO should have at least continued to move the Cut Off Dates, rather than stopping at 01JAN09.

I do think the early movement was too slow and he should have reached the end of 2008 at least a month earlier.


I agree with that. If you consider that the ratio of EB2:EB3 PERM has swung heavily towards EB2, the EB3 numbers must have dropped significantly, regardless of the lower PERM numbers.


I believe the last published DOS Demand Data it is an accurate representation of the Demand that DOS can see. DOS cannot "see" cases that USCIS have not adjudicated.

The 6-8 weeks comment was for the numbers to appear even in USCIS own Inventory Report. DOS won't see the Demand for 3-6 months, depending how fast USCIS process the cases.

I think the recently published USCIS July Inventory reflects only a small fraction of the cases actually submitted to that date by EB3-ROW. Judging by EB2-IC last year, it will take several months to properly reflect the numbers. The earliest USCIS Invenry I would even remotely trust would be in May 2014.

The retrogression question is more tricky and subjective.

By the time October starts, the oldest "new" cases from May 2013 will be 5 months old. Even July 2013 cases will be 4 months old by the end of October. There has to be a high chance that USCIS will adjudicate many of those cases through October. That will be Demand against the 2.6k that EB3-ROW may have available for October 2013. With that in mind, there is a high likelihood, if CO takes that possibility into consideration, that EB3-ROW will retrogress in October back into 2008.

The 2.6K is per country limit correct? Or the whole EB3 ROW got 2.6K only?

For example, I'm from Indonesia, so my country limit supposedly 2.6 K right? Or the rest of the world only have 2.6 K?

[Pedro Gonzales]

The 2.6K is per country limit correct? Or the whole EB3 ROW got 2.6K only?

For example, I'm from Indonesia, so my country limit supposedly 2.6 K right? Or the rest of the world only have 2.6 K?

That's for the whole of the rest of the world but just for the month of October, not for the whole year. Indonesia itself has about 250 for the month, but will not come close to having that much demand.

[erikbond101]

Country limit is 7% of available visas, so that will be 2803 for Indonesia. For EB3-ROW that will be much-much higher as EB3-WW limit is 40040.
Spec, I do have one question why none of the EB3 countries are current if annual quota is 2803.

[Spectator]

The 2.6K is per country limit correct? Or the whole EB3 ROW got 2.6K only?

For example, I'm from Indonesia, so my country limit supposedly 2.6 K right? Or the rest of the world only have 2.6 K?

The 2.6k refers to the notional monthly allotment that all of EB3-ROW might have available to them in October 2013.

In theory, the annual allocation for EB3-ROW in a year when 140,000 visas are available to EB is 29,128.

That is the 40,040 available to EB3 as a whole, less 2,803 each for India, Mexico and Philippines, less 2,503 for China.

The law says that not more than 27% of EB visas may be used in each of the first 3 quarters, which equates to 9% per month.

Prorated, EB3-ROW would have 29,128 * 9% = 2,622 visas available in October.

In reality, EB3-ROW never receives the notional allocation.

The notional 7% per Country limit within EB3 is 2,803 visas. With the exception of South Korea (which exceeds it for other reasons), no Country in ROW even remotely approaches that number. Individual Countries are constrained from doing so by the overall Cut Off Date set for EB3-WW.

Philippines (and in the past, Mexico before they reached the same Cut Off Date as ROW) regularly exceed the notional EB3 7% limit for other reasons, so EB3-ROW has less visas available than the calculated allocation would suggest (perhaps around 24-25k at best).

[Spectator]

Country limit is 7% of available visas, so that will be 2803 for Indonesia. For EB3-ROW that will be much-much higher as EB3-WW limit is 40040.
Spec, I do have one question why none of the EB3 countries are current if annual quota is 2803.

erikbond,

Well before any EB3-ROW Country can reach their 7% limit in a year, the overall number of visas available to EB3 is exhausted. No individual Country can have a Cut Off Date later than that set for EB3-WW. That date is set based on the overall numbers available to EB3-WW.

About 150 Countries make up the ROW group, but only about 24k visas are available to them at best. That is an average of only 160 visas per Country, or less than 6% of the 7% limit.

Last year, South Korea used 5k of those alone (for reasons that have been explained many times), so the average available for the other Countries had already dropped to 125 each. That was in a year when extra FB visas were available.

In reality of course, not all 150 Countries have even 125 demand for the year, but insufficient numbers are available to Countries with higher demand to allow them anywhere near their own individual 7% limit.

Reaching the 7% limit is just a dream for EB3-ROW Countries.

[qesehmk]

Spec - 7% is an arbitrary number if you think about it. With 160 countries in the world - everybody can't have 7% anyway. The math just doesn't add up.

erikbond,

Well before any EB3-ROW Country can reach their 7% limit in a year, the overall number of visas available to EB3 is exhausted. No individual Country can have a Cut Off Date later than that set for EB3-WW. That date is set based on the overall numbers available to EB3-WW.

About 150 Countries make up the ROW group, but only about 24k visas are available to them at best. That is an average of only 160 visas per Country, or less than 6% of the 7% limit.

Last year, South Korea used 5k of those alone (for reasons that have been explained many times), so the average available for the other Countries had already dropped to 125 each. That was in a year when extra FB visas were available.

In reality of course, not all 150 Countries have even 125 demand for the year, but insufficient numbers are available to Countries with higher demand to allow them anywhere near their own individual 7% limit.

Reaching the 7% limit is just a dream for EB3-ROW Countries.

[Pedro Gonzales]

Spec - 7% is an arbitrary number if you think about it. With 160 countries in the world - everybody can't have 7% anyway. The math just doesn't add up.

In my old Trackitt days, in the midst of the debates on the fairness and rationality of the country caps, I'd stipulated that EB3I would be better served by decreasing the country cap to 1/160 each than as is. That audience there didn't much understand my math but the basic logic is sound.

40K visas split 160 ways allows each country 250 visas per year. Some 20 countries would be retrogressed, resulting in significant spillover from the remaining EB3ROW to the retrogressed countries. That spillover will then go to the most retrogressed candidates who all happen to be from India. EB3 I, by my estimate back then if memory serves me right, would have got about 10K visas per year.

[qesehmk]

Very good thought process. So if you think about it - 7% limit is more to restrict the four specific countries rather than have diversity.

Because your formula achieves diversity just as much as the 7% rule does. But 7% controls the flow from these 4 countries. viz. India china mexico and philipines.

In my old Trackitt days, in the midst of the debates on the fairness and rationality of the country caps, I'd stipulated that EB3I would be better served by decreasing the country cap to 1/160 each than as is. That audience there didn't much understand my math but the basic logic is sound.

40K visas split 160 ways allows each country 250 visas per year. Some 20 countries would be retrogressed, resulting in significant spillover from the remaining EB3ROW to the retrogressed countries. That spillover will then go to the most retrogressed candidates who all happen to be from India. EB3 I, by my estimate back then if memory serves me right, would have got about 10K visas per year.

[Spectator]

Spec - 7% is an arbitrary number if you think about it. With 160 countries in the world - everybody can't have 7% anyway. The math just doesn't add up.

Q,

I agree.

That is why the total visas available to EB3-ROW (or a Category) becomes the rate limiting step for all Countries not pulled aside for reaching the 7% limit.

I don't think generally that people understand this concept if they are from a Country such as India that can (and do) receive the full 7% allocation.

The 7% concept has no meaning for ROW, since it is as unattainable as EB3-I ever becoming Current under current law. In fact, no ROW Country would reach it.

The effect on ROW of a single Country being allowed to use 30-50% (or 100% initially) of the allocation in a Category when there are insufficient visas to accommodate everybody must be obvious. EB3 is particularly vulnerable because both India and Philippines would both have a very large demand.

I am not a fan of per Country limits per se (it is an idiotic way to "ration" GCs), but I do think a control mechanism is required to best serve US interests if there are less visas available than applicants. That could be based on a severe shortage list or another similar mechanism, but simply removing the per Country limits in isolation is not the answer. Without it, the USA will find itself unable to attract people they need outside the skill base that a few high Demand Countries provide at present.

If sufficient visas are available, any control mechanism becomes moot, which is why I favour changes such as removing dependents from the count. Even in that situation, I would still favour the control mechanism being in the legislation in case it is needed in the future.

[Pedro Gonzales]

In my old Trackitt days, in the midst of the debates on the fairness and rationality of the country caps, I'd stipulated that EB3I would be better served by decreasing the country cap to 1/160 each than as is. That audience there didn't much understand my math but the basic logic is sound.

40K visas split 160 ways allows each country 250 visas per year. Some 20 countries would be retrogressed, resulting in significant spillover from the remaining EB3ROW to the retrogressed countries. That spillover will then go to the most retrogressed candidates who all happen to be from India. EB3 I, by my estimate back then if memory serves me right, would have got about 10K visas per year.

Source: DoS FY12 Annual Report Table V Part II

Countries that exceeded by 250 per country level in EB3 in FY2012:
South Africa: 410
Bangladesh: 257
China: 2,827
Taiwan: 490
India: 2,804
Indonesia: 255
Iran: 288
Israel: 333
Japan: 692
South Korea: 4,975
Malaysia: 273
Nepal: 257
Pakistan: 1,090
Philippines: 6,479
Great Britain: 828
Poland: 695
Turkey: 284
Canada: 1,245
El Salvador: 270
Jamaica: 339
Mexico: 3,748
Argentina: 427
Brazil: 1,045
Colombia: 952
Ecuador: 644
Peru: 586
Venezuela: 737
Total: 33,230 (the rest were used up by countries that each used < 250)
Regular quota of 250 x 27 countries = 6,750
Spillover available = 26,480

After the first two years, 27 countries would be retrogressed to the same point.

Whenever people used the diversity card to rationalize country caps, and refused to accept that there was as much diversity in India as in Europe or South America, I'd show them this analysis and tell them that if they were so gung ho on country caps for diversity, drop it down to the real cap of 250 per country per year and I'd be fine with it. Though, on trackitt, my posts were drowned out by responses of "bring it on" by ROW folks who didn't understand the #s and "no, it'll make things even worse" by EB3I folk who understood the # even less.

[qesehmk]

..
I am not a fan of per Country limits per se (it is an idiotic way to "ration" GCs), but I do think a control mechanism is required to best serve US interests if there are less visas available than applicants. That could be based on a severe shortage list or another similar mechanism, but simply removing the per Country limits in isolation is not the answer. Without it, the USA will find itself unable to attract people they need outside the rather mono skill base that India provides at present.

I think the per country control mechanism is required for asylum cases. But for EB visas - I would rather market be that control mechanism for per country limits and then the US government can limit the overall visas. If US government wants to limit the skill then just do that saying so many green cards for these categories based on skills.

But to restrict people based on where they were born is utter discrimination and so unbecoming of various things that I have to admire of this country and its ideals.

[Spectator]

I think the per country control mechanism is required for asylum cases. But for EB visas - I would rather market be that control mechanism for per country limits and then the US government can limit the overall visas. If US government wants to limit the skill then just do that saying so many green cards for these categories based on skills.

But to restrict people based on where they were born is utter discrimination and so unbecoming of various things that I have to admire of this country and its ideals.

Q,

Then we agree.

Currently there is no limitation of any sort on asylum and refugee cases. There used to be for one of them, but that was scrapped and the 2 categories combined now use as many visas as EB (151k in FY2012).

[gcq]

In my old Trackitt days, in the midst of the debates on the fairness and rationality of the country caps, I'd stipulated that EB3I would be better served by decreasing the country cap to 1/160 each than as is. That audience there didn't much understand my math but the basic logic is sound.

40K visas split 160 ways allows each country 250 visas per year. Some 20 countries would be retrogressed, resulting in significant spillover from the remaining EB3ROW to the retrogressed countries. That spillover will then go to the most retrogressed candidates who all happen to be from India. EB3 I, by my estimate back then if memory serves me right, would have got about 10K visas per year.

Good thought, but this has a flaw. What if ROW demand is high enough not to allow any fall-over ? Then EB3-I would be retrogressed severly than it is now. Remember all these years, EB3-ROW was mostly backlogged.