EB2 Predictions (Rather Calculations) - 2011

[gcwait2007]

gcwait2007,
Don't worry you will get a chance this year!

Thank you, veni001, for your comforting words.

[kd2008]

With a EB2-I PD of very late Q3 of 2010, I am expecting to be current in Q3 of 2017 at the earliest with the current trend. Who knows after that when it will be for GC. I hope I stick around till then.

Last night, I got my I-140 approval email. Now I wish ALL categories are current in June bulletin.

I know its not gonna happen. But its good to hope, I guess.

[gcwait2007]

I feel that the following would be the demand data for June 2011:

Prior to China India Others GT
January 1, 2006 0 0 0 0
January 1, 2007 3,700 10,500 0 14,200
January 1, 2008 9,000 20,300 0 29,300
January 1, 2011 9,100 20,400 100 29,600

In the month of May 2011, 3000 EB2 India and China GCs were issued.

As per estimate, PWMB prior to Jan 1, 2007 is almost zero. The number will not exceed 100 according to some sample data. EB3 to EB2 India upgrade is estimated to be about 20%, for the year 2006. Total number of EB3 pending cases for 2006 is 10,726 and 30% works out to 3300.

To complete 2006 and cross into 2007, SOFAD required = 14200+100+3300 = 17600.

I hope with SOFAD estimated, EB2 India and China would reach March 2007.

[veni001]

I feel that the following would be the demand data for June 2011:

Prior to China India Others GT
January 1, 2006 0 0 0 0
January 1, 2007 3,700 10,500 0 14,200
January 1, 2008 9,000 20,300 0 29,300
January 1, 2011 9,100 20,400 100 29,600

In the month of May 2011, 3000 EB2 India and China GCs were issued.

As per estimate, PWMB prior to Jan 1, 2007 is almost zero. The number will not exceed 100 according to some sample data. EB3 to EB2 India upgrade is estimated to be about 20%, for the year 2006. Total number of EB3 pending cases for 2006 is 10,726 and 30% works out to 3300.

To complete 2006 and cross into 2007, SOFAD required = 14200+100+3300 = 17600.

I hope with SOFAD estimated, EB2 India and China would reach March 2007.

gcwait2007,
You mean 20% or 30%?

For 20% EBI3-->EBI2 porting(2003-2006) numbers 4k (6k for 30%) out of the 17,830 PERM certifications from first half of of FY2011 must be porting PERMs.

Since EB1 is down by 70% and assuming all those reflect in new PERM cases for FY 2011 as EB2 means (about 2K) significant reduction in new IND EB filings?

[Spectator]

After one week (which is 5 working days) there have been 59 primary applicant approvals for EB2-I.

This represents 962 approvals in the real world. There are probably a few more yet to be reported.

Since there are 21 working days in May, the prorated approvals for the entire month becomes 4,040.

TK's figure of 4.5k looks pretty good at the moment.

[shaumack]

shaumack,
DOS/USCIS definition (interpretation) of retrogression is based on total (EB+FB) approvals{7% of (226k+140k)} than just one. As long as their interpretation is valid all non-retrogressed countries(not only South Korea) can get as much EB2 allocation as possible!

Thanks veni. I was missing this information. I went back and checked past visa bulletins and one of it mentioned this in detail which clarifies doubts on South Korea.

Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed. Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however.

Applicability of Section 202(a)(5): INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act, removed the per-country limit on Employment-based immigrants in any calendar quarter in which applicant demand for numbers in one or more Employment-based preferences is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5) has allowed countries such as China – mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused. Such numbers are provided strictly in priority date order without regard to the foreign state chargeability, and the same cut-off date applies to any country benefiting from this provision.

Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)

Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, “2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.” The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.

Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:

If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state’s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.

[veni001]

After one week (which is 5 working days) there have been 59 primary applicant approvals for EB2-I.

This represents 962 approvals in the real world. There are probably a few more yet to be reported.

Since there are 21 working days in May, the prorated approvals for the entire month becomes 4,040.

TK's figure of 4.5k looks pretty good at the moment.

Spec,
Very good information, assuming that USCIS did not release all 12K EB1 unused VISAS from Q1&Q2(due to 27% usage limit) in May, we should see another 2 month movement for June, and hopefully last quarter(July-Aug-Sept) will see similar to FY2010 PD movement for EB2I&C!

[gcwait2007]

gcwait2007,
You mean 20% or 30%?

For 20% EBI3-->EBI2 porting(2003-2006) numbers 4k (6k for 30%) out of the 17,830 PERM certifications from first half of of FY2011 must be porting PERMs.

Since EB1 is down by 70% and assuming all those reflect in new PERM cases for FY 2011 as EB2 means (about 2K) significant reduction in new IND EB filings?

sorry for the typo. Should be read as 20%. The new portings would be 2200.

[qesehmk]

Spec

I posted the trackitt trend and the predictions based on them (if the trend were to hold) about 2 days back.

I can post your material as is: but to avoid redundant postings .. would you mind taking a look at what I posted and then accordingly either suggest me something or adjust your material.

Also its important that we include sometakeaway for people along with facts and figures for people to easily grasp what teh facts convey.

p.s. - Regarding admin stuff ... its some work to keep it closed and yet make entries yourself. I can make you admin if you want. That way you can make the changes yourself.

[Spectator]

Spec

I posted the trackitt trend and the predictions based on them (if the trend were to hold) about 2 days back.

I can post your material as is: but to avoid redundant postings .. would you mind taking a look at what I posted and then accordingly either suggest me something or adjust your material.

Also its important that we include sometakeaway for people along with facts and figures for people to easily grasp what teh facts convey.

p.s. - Regarding admin stuff ... its some work to keep it closed and yet make entries yourself. I can make you admin if you want. That way you can make the changes yourself.

Q,

I saw what you posted at the time and it is excellent.

In my opinion this is different, since it is not trying to extrapolate to SOFAD, merely looking at Trackitt trends. I believe it is complimentary, but different.

It is data that number crunchers might appreciate, rather than the general population. For instance, it is easy to see the different numbers for October 2009 versus October 2010, or whether some months had particularly high approvals.

It is looking at where we have reached and how we reached this point, rather than where we will end up at the end of the year. I think that is the best explanation I can think of at the moment. Going forward, the tables would show progress up to and through spillover season.

If you don't think it it is suitable for that section, I am fine with that.

The explanation of what the tables represent precedes the actual tables themselves.

I suspect if you are asking the question, then it probably is not what you had in mind.

I'll leave the posts for a few days - maybe others want to comment. After that, I will delete them, because I think they take up too much room in the EB2 forum.

[veni001]

Q,

I saw what you posted at the time and it is excellent.

In my opinion this is different, since it is not trying to extrapolate to SOFAD, merely looking at Trackitt trends. I believe it is complimentary, but different.

It is data that number crunchers might appreciate, rather than the general population. For instance, it is easy to see the different numbers for October 2009 versus October 2010, or whether some months had particularly high approvals.

It is looking at where we have reached and how we reached this point, rather than where we will end up at the end of the year. I think that is the best explanation I can think of at the moment. Going forward, the tables would show progress up to and through spillover season.

If you don't think it it is suitable for that section, I am fine with that.

The explanation of what the tables represent precedes the actual tables themselves.

I suspect if you are asking the question, then it probably is not what you had in mind.

I'll leave the posts for a few days - maybe others want to comment. After that, I will delete them, because I think they take up too much room in the EB2 forum.

Spec,
Let's hope the number hold good for the remainder of FY 2011!

Even at 55% reduction EB1 will yield 22k, interestingly EB2-ROW did not show significant jump to compensate EB1 reduction. If it goes to 125% by Q4 (hope not) then it will not yield any. If EB4-EB5 hold the same level then we should see 32K overall SOFAD (in addition to 6K EB2I&C regular).

Overall unknowns of unknowns is porting numbers(?)

[admin]

Spec

I posted your info there. Let me know if you want to change anything.

Q,

I saw what you posted at the time and it is excellent.

In my opinion this is different, since it is not trying to extrapolate to SOFAD, merely looking at Trackitt trends. I believe it is complimentary, but different.

It is data that number crunchers might appreciate, rather than the general population. For instance, it is easy to see the different numbers for October 2009 versus October 2010, or whether some months had particularly high approvals.

It is looking at where we have reached and how we reached this point, rather than where we will end up at the end of the year. I think that is the best explanation I can think of at the moment. Going forward, the tables would show progress up to and through spillover season.

If you don't think it it is suitable for that section, I am fine with that.

The explanation of what the tables represent precedes the actual tables themselves.

I suspect if you are asking the question, then it probably is not what you had in mind.

I'll leave the posts for a few days - maybe others want to comment. After that, I will delete them, because I think they take up too much room in the EB2 forum.

[soggadu]

Spec,
Let's hope the number hold good for the remainder of FY 2011!

Even at 55% reduction EB1 will yield 22k, interestingly EB2-ROW did not show significant jump to compensate EB1 reduction. If it goes to 125% by Q4 (hope not) then it will not yield any. If EB4-EB5 hold the same level then we should see 32K overall SOFAD (in addition to 6K EB2I&C regular).



Overall unknowns of unknowns is porting numbers(?)

Veni.... From your calculations of Eb1 and from facts section the sofad would be 38k.... So please tell me why we can't expect the date to move after July 07.... From old demand data sheets I see that prior to 2008 we have back log of 32k for india and china combined.... And porting is supposed to be at 6k at max as we havent seen the dates retrogress.... In this scenario CIS has to move dates beyond July 07 in order to use all the demand rather than move it till mar 07 in which case pwmb gang can apply but can't be processed during this fiscal year....

So... I think dates will move towards dec 07 and then retrogress.... What do you all think??

[veni001]

Veni.... From your calculations of Eb1 and from facts section the sofad would be 38k.... So please tell me why we can't expect the date to move after July 07.... From old demand data sheets I see that prior to 2008 we have back log of 32k for india and china combined.... And porting is supposed to be at 6k at max as we havent seen the dates retrogress.... In this scenario CIS has to move dates beyond July 07 in order to use all the demand rather than move it till mar 07 in which case pwmb gang can apply but can't be processed during this fiscal year....

So... I think dates will move towards dec 07 and then retrogress.... What do you all think??

soggadu,
Assume the demand stays the same for the remainder of FY 2011, one thing every one not able to get handle (including DOS/USCIS) is porting numbers. If the porting numbers (more or less) stay the same as FY 2010 then dates will move post July 2007 and retrogress back in Oct 2011, based on PWMB cases filed.

[soggadu]

soggadu,
Assume the demand stays the same for the remainder of FY 2011, one thing every one not able to get handle (including DOS/USCIS) is porting numbers. If the porting numbers (more or less) stay the same as FY 2010 then dates will move post July 2007 and retrogress back in Oct 2011, based on PWMB cases filed.

Veni.... Just wondering.... If porting numbers are really that big then EB2 dates might have retrogressed as Q mentioned before right....

[veni001]

Veni.... Just wondering.... If porting numbers are really that big then EB2 dates might have retrogressed as Q mentioned before right....

soggadu,
Agree... but DOS/USCIS wants to play safe until Q4!
Let's hope for the best.

[Spectator]

Spec,
Let's hope the number hold good for the remainder of FY 2011!

Even at 55% reduction EB1 will yield 22k, interestingly EB2-ROW did not show significant jump to compensate EB1 reduction. If it goes to 125% by Q4 (hope not) then it will not yield any. If EB4-EB5 hold the same level then we should see 32K overall SOFAD (in addition to 6K EB2I&C regular).

Overall unknowns of unknowns is porting numbers(?)

Veni,

Let's hope so. That is certainly the best scenario.

On figures to the end of April, simplistically, 13.7 / 7 * 12 = 23.6k or 16.4k from EB1.

If the underlying trend is more like 60% then that only gives around 14.5k from EB1.

The other fact is that whilst in the real world, India represented only 16.4% of EB1 approvals in FY2010, whilst in Trackitt they represent 63.2% of EB1 approvals. This means there is a danger that the Trackitt data is skewed. Indian approvals are running at 54.1% of last year and the underlying trend is nearer 70%.

There are many ways to look at the raw data.

Everything is in the interpretation, which is why I deliberately did not include any projections to year end.

EB1 has been very patchy with approvals - very few for a several months then a glut in April. Were USCIS carrying out "Kazarian" training?

I still find it extremely difficult to forecast where EB1 will end up.

[veni001]

Veni,

Let's hope so. That is certainly the best scenario.

On figures to the end of April, simplistically, 13.7 / 7 * 12 = 23.6k or 16.4k from EB1.

If the underlying trend is more like 60% then that only gives around 14.5k from EB1.

The other fact is that whilst in the real world, India represented only 16.4% of EB1 approvals in FY2010, whilst in Trackitt they represent 63.2% of EB1 approvals. This means there is a danger that the Trackitt data is skewed. Indian approvals are running at 54.1% of last year and the underlying trend is nearer 70%.

There are many ways to look at the raw data.

Everything is in the interpretation, which is why I deliberately did not include any projections to year end.

EB1 has been very patchy with approvals - very few for a several months then a glut in April. Were USCIS carrying out "Kazarian" training?

I still find it extremely difficult to forecast where EB1 will end up.

Spec,
Please check post #1387.
I don't think EB1 will be at 70% of last year at any cost. The reason for my confidence is please check the number of PERM approvals vs no. of i-140 receipts for last two quarters/one year, the difference should represent EB1(irrespective of country, and also add about 8K pending as of 10-01-2010). As long as this validates 70% claim, no questions asked.

[Spectator]

Spec,
Please check post #1387.
I don't think EB1 will be at 70% of last year at any cost. The reason for my confidence is please check the number of PERM approvals vs no. of i-140 receipts for last two quarters/one year, the difference should represent EB1(irrespective of country, and also add about 8K pending as of 10-01-2010). As long as this validates 70% claim, no questions asked.

Veni,

I wasn't trying to claim that that EB1 will reach 70% of last year's figures.

The figure merely highlights the disparity in Trackitt within EB1 and vindicates my decision not to include projections.

I will reiterate that it is raw data for people to make their own decision about. It is inevitable that we may all have different interpretations.

Personally, I do think EB1 approvals are likely somewhat higher than the simple % represents.

At this time, I don't know by how much.

Until I can understand this better, I am assuming no more than 16k from EB1 itself.

The figures to date do not suggest the 24k that some people have talked about, so I take CO's statement to mean at least 12k for the year, based on the trend in the first 6 months.

I consider myself to be continuing in blissful ignorance as far as EB1 is concerned.

[qesehmk]

Spec

You would be blissfully ignorant if you extrapolated 12K to 24K for EB1 and assumed thats going to be the pure EB1 SOFAD

clearly you didn't ...

Its so hard to predict even today since USCIS has all the tools to implement their policy. I guess what we can put in the bag is the fact that Nov 2006 is absolute certainty. Other than that ... it could be anywhere between nov 06 to all the way aug 2007. The maximum probability being around Mar 2007

Veni,

I wasn't trying to claim that that EB1 will reach 70% of last year's figures.

The figure merely highlights the disparity in Trackitt within EB1 and vindicates my decision not to include projections.

I will reiterate that it is raw data for people to make their own decision about. It is inevitable that we may all have different interpretations.

Personally, I do think EB1 approvals are likely somewhat higher than the simple % represents.

At this time, I don't know by how much.

Until I can understand this better, I am assuming no more than 16k from EB1 itself.

The figures to date do not suggest the 24k that some people have talked about, so I take CO's statement to mean at least 12k for the year, based on the trend in the first 6 months.

I consider myself to be continuing in blissful ignorance as far as EB1 is concerned.

[hsinghjkaur]

I have hardly seen demand data being released after 8th or 9th of the month... I hope that it is released today for June VB. Has anyone seen it being released after 10th in the past?

[veni001]

Veni,

I wasn't trying to claim that that EB1 will reach 70% of last year's figures.

The figure merely highlights the disparity in Trackitt within EB1 and vindicates my decision not to include projections.

I will reiterate that it is raw data for people to make their own decision about. It is inevitable that we may all have different interpretations.

Personally, I do think EB1 approvals are likely somewhat higher than the simple % represents.

At this time, I don't know by how much.

Until I can understand this better, I am assuming no more than 16k from EB1 itself.

The figures to date do not suggest the 24k that some people have talked about, so I take CO's statement to mean at least 12k for the year, based on the trend in the first 6 months.

I consider myself to be continuing in blissful ignorance as far as EB1 is concerned.

Thanks Spec

[veni001]

I have hardly seen demand data being released after 8th or 9th of the month... I hope that it is released today for June VB. Has anyone seen it being released after 10th in the past?

It can come out any time, just keep watching

[TeddyKoochu]

Spec & Veni here is a calculation on EB1 from Trackitt data. Spec I agree with you that the 12K appears to be full year. This is similar to the EB2 ROW calculation I did a few days back, I believe just in that case the lower figures should be extrapolated by an effectiveness factor. The biggest drawback of the Trackitt data that you pointed out is that its mostly for India however I thing that extrapolation should take care of that as the factor has been derived from historic data from the same source which will also be similarly skewed.

EB1-A + EB1-B + EB1-C
2009 - 98 + 191 + 267 = 556
2010 - 101 + 158 + 123 = 382

The Consumption for EB1 for 2009 and 2010 for EB1 was ~ 41K, in 2009 EB1 got spillover from EB5 of 1K whereas in 2010 the cap was higher and EB1 consumed 41K.

So efectiveness factor = 382 / 556 = 68%.

7 Months of FY 2010 - 74 + 123 + 89 = 286
7 Months of FY 2011 - 36 + 48 + 44 = 128

Now the projected consumption for EB1 is (128/286) * 41.5K ~ 18573.
However we should extrapolate this by the effectiveness factor 18573 * 100 / 68 = 27300.

This gives a projected fall down of 40K - 27.3K ~ 12.5K which is very similar to the 12K figure that has been in the news.

[qesehmk]

Teddy

What would you attribute the reduction in 2009-10 trackitt numbers for EB1 for same level of EB1 approvals?

I wonder if that is correlated with the EB1 cycle time. And if it is then I would check if teh cycle time reduced further between 10-11. Only then using an effectiveness factor would make sense.

Does it make sense?

Spec & Veni here is a calculation on EB1 from Trackitt data. Spec I agree with you that the 12K appears to be full year. This is similar to the EB2 ROW calculation I did a few days back, I believe just in that case the lower figures should be extrapolated by an effectiveness factor. The biggest drawback of the Trackitt data that you pointed out is that its mostly for India however I thing that extrapolation should take care of that as the factor has been derived from historic data from the same source which will also be similarly skewed.

EB1-A + EB1-B + EB1-C
2009 - 98 + 191 + 267 = 556
2010 - 101 + 158 + 123 = 382

The Consumption for EB1 for 2009 and 2010 for EB1 was ~ 41K, in 2009 EB1 got spillover from EB5 of 1K whereas in 2010 the cap was higher and EB1 consumed 41K.

So efectiveness factor = 382 / 556 = 68%.

7 Months of FY 2010 - 74 + 123 + 89 = 286
7 Months of FY 2011 - 36 + 48 + 44 = 128

Now the projected consumption for EB1 is (128/286) * 41.5K ~ 18573.
However we should extrapolate this by the effectiveness factor 18573 * 100 / 68 = 27300.

This gives a projected fall down of 40K - 27.3K ~ 12.5K which is very similar to the 12K figure that has been in the news.