• Hello Members, This forums is for DV lottery visas only. For other immigration related questions, please go to our forums home page, find the related forum and post it there.

2014 winner need your help

britsimon said:
Thew 140K does not include derivatives. You can prove that by looking at the CEAC data (as above) and also previous years stats for winners and derivative visas issued. The wording also is quite clear and yes the fall out rate is huge.

The increase of selectees was a surprise to everyone - but it certainly means (in my opinion) that lots of people will be left without a visa.
Click to expand...

Sorry how do you prove that derivatives is not in the part of the selectees announced? By looking at the selectees case # and their family members as attached to the same case # do not prove the number of selectees is without derivatives.
 
Yes, a more thing, if you look at the consular post visa issued is more than selectees as a proof. That is not right because consular post can issued visa for others countries and selectees are based on foreign chargeability.
 
kayend said:
Yes, a more thing, if you look at the consular post visa issued is more than selectees as a proof. That is not right because consular post can issued visa for others countries and selectees are based on foreign chargeability.
Click to expand...

I'll look for the spreadsheet that makes that more clear but the wording of each years "selected entrants" page makes it clear. For instance 2013 is here http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/types/types_5715.html

Note how it says "Approximately 105,628 applicants have been registered." Then later it says "Applicants registered for the DV-2013 program were selected at random from 7,941,400 qualified entries (12,577,463 with derivatives)" In other words the 105k was applicants and applicants are selected from the 7.9million entries (which then have a further 4.5million derivatives. Make sense.

NOW THEN. I said earlier the 50k is based on selectees and derivatives. I have seen data that confirms that also (as it listed visas issued per country with derivatives on top. However, I just came across this note:

"9 FAM 42.51 PN3.3 “Recaptured” Immediate
Relative Visa
(CT:VISA-1004; 09-04-2008)
Immediate relative visas are not subject to numerical limit, and therefore no
visa numbers are allocated or used for immediate relative visa issuances.
Under the terms of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) as revised by
the Immigration Act of 1990, however, each year’s total of immediate relatives
must be considered when the Department calculates the family
preference numerical limit for the following year. Thus, it is important for
the Department to know when immediate relative visas are unused by the
recipients so that such visas will not be counted in determining the family
preference limit. Posts are asked to report such “recaptured” immediate
relative visas to CA/VO/F/I in the same manner as recaptured visa numbers;
they should be identified as “Recaptured Immediate Relative Visa(s),” and
the month and year of visa issuance should be indicated."

That bolded statement contradicts my understanding. I would be interested interested to hear others opinions on that...
 
britsimon said:
I'll look for the spreadsheet that makes that more clear but the wording of each years "selected entrants" page makes it clear. For instance 2013 is here http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/types/types_5715.html

Note how it says "Approximately 105,628 applicants have been registered." Then later it says "Applicants registered for the DV-2013 program were selected at random from 7,941,400 qualified entries (12,577,463 with derivatives)" In other words the 105k was applicants and applicants are selected from the 7.9million entries (which then have a further 4.5million derivatives. Make sense.

NOW THEN. I said earlier the 50k is based on selectees and derivatives. I have seen data that confirms that also (as it listed visas issued per country with derivatives on top. However, I just came across this note:

"9 FAM 42.51 PN3.3 “Recaptured” Immediate
Relative Visa
(CT:VISA-1004; 09-04-2008)
Immediate relative visas are not subject to numerical limit, and therefore no
visa numbers are allocated or used for immediate relative visa issuances.
Under the terms of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) as revised by
the Immigration Act of 1990, however, each year’s total of immediate relatives
must be considered when the Department calculates the family
preference numerical limit for the following year. Thus, it is important for
the Department to know when immediate relative visas are unused by the
recipients so that such visas will not be counted in determining the family
preference limit. Posts are asked to report such “recaptured” immediate
relative visas to CA/VO/F/I in the same manner as recaptured visa numbers;
they should be identified as “Recaptured Immediate Relative Visa(s),” and
the month and year of visa issuance should be indicated."

That bolded statement contradicts my understanding. I would be interested interested to hear others opinions on that...
Click to expand...

Sorry, I still don't see how this statement said anything about the selectees announced with derivatives. It just said that it has around 8millions applicants and ~12millions inclusive of derivatives. Of course the selection is from 8 millions and not from the 12 millions pool because the derivatives cannot have a distinct case # on their own, it has to attach with a primary applicant. If it select from the 12 millions pool, it mean applicants with more family members will have better chances of being selected which is not the way they do the selection, so it has to come from the 8 millions pool for the selection and if the selected primary selectee has family members it will add to the selection quota which is 140k in dv14. What I just said is based on my understanding so far.
 
I have seen data that confirms that also (as it listed visas issued per country with derivatives on top.

If I am mistaken the bold statement refer to some data shown by Reavsky, that said Greece (or some other country in Europe I cannot really remember) has higher visa issued than selectees. The visa issued is based on consular post and selectees are based on foreign chargeability so that cannot be use to prove selectees does not include derivatives as well.
 
kayend said:
Sorry, I still don't see how this statement said anything about the selectees announced with derivatives. It just said that it has around 8millions applicants and ~12millions inclusive of derivatives. Of course the selection is from 8 millions and not from the 12 millions pool because the derivatives cannot have a distinct case # on their own, it has to attach with a primary applicant. If it select from the 12 millions pool, it mean applicants with more family members will have better chances of being selected which is not the way they do the selection, so it has to come from the 8 millions pool for the selection and if the selected primary selectee has family members it will add to the selection quota which is 140k in dv14. What I just said is based on my understanding so far.
Click to expand...

Well it says the selectees (105K in that year) were selected from the 7.9 million. I know they speak "American English" but that is pretty conclusive.... unless they are posting an incorrect statement (which wouldn't be the first time.

Regarding Raevskys data - no that wasn't it actually...

No biggie though, believe it if you want....
 
Hi britsimon,
i am from asia ..my case number is AS29XX ..i cant wait please share, When i will get second notification letter?
 
Nerandima said:
They have already published the November VB right??
Click to expand...

No - it is all a little confusing. The latest VB published is the October VB. It was published a few days ago (in September) and contains cutoff information for the current month (October) and advanced notification for the following month (November).
 
britsimon said:
No - it is all a little confusing. The latest VB published is the October VB. It was published a few days ago (in September) and contains cutoff information for the current month (October) and advanced notification for the following month (November).
Click to expand...

Why they are giving advance notification ?? is there any difference between advance notification and VB ?
 
Nerandima said:
Why they are giving advance notification ?? is there any difference between advance notification and VB ?
Click to expand...

The visa bulletin covers a number of topics, not just the DV process. For the DV process the advanced notification is important because it alerts people that they will (or won't) get processed in that coming month. The idea is that the VB (and the 2NL email) give people around 4 to 6 weeks notice to start getting police reports and medicals which can take time...
 
Green card lottery 2014 numbers issue and process

My case number is 2014AS00015***
I submitted documents with two photgraph to Kentucky office. Afterwords I send email asking process of my application. They have reply me my applications are received and currently processing.
additionally they have tell like this "
Please refer to the visa bulletin on our website at www.travel.state.gov after the 15th of September to locate the current numbers being processed."
So I discover to browse my number. Unfortunately I couldn't find. If you have any idea about next process pls guide me. Also let me know possibility of getting Visa for my alternate case number 2014AS00015***

Thank You,
 
amilahulse said:
My case number is 2014AS00015***
I submitted documents with two photgraph to Kentucky office. Afterwords I send email asking process of my application. They have reply me my applications are received and currently processing.
additionally they have tell like this "
Please refer to the visa bulletin on our website at www.travel.state.gov after the 15th of September to locate the current numbers being processed."
So I discover to browse my number. Unfortunately I couldn't find. If you have any idea about next process pls guide me. Also let me know possibility of getting Visa for my alternate case number 2014AS00015***

Thank You,
Click to expand...

Your case # is not current yet, so you need to wait for few more months. You should start preparing your civil documents and save as much money as you can. Based on my prediction, your case # might goes current by either July or August 2014.
 
Dear Brittsmon,

In the form 230, I have slight omplication understanding very well Number 14, which says Spouse maiden or Family name. My wife had and answered her last name as ABC before marriage and after marriage she adopts my surname(CDE) as hers as well...please I want to know which of the names is the correct name to be completed in Number 14.

Additionally, during the EDV, she used tthe adopted name CDE, what is the right thing that sppose to be in Number 14 of I-230?

Thanks for your quick response
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Agu said:
Dear Brittsmon,

In the form 230, I have slight omplication understanding very well Number 14, which says Spouse maiden or Family name. My wife had and answered her last name as ABC before marriage and after marriage she adopts my surname(CDE) as hers as well...please I want to know which of the names is the correct name to be completed in Number 14.

Additionally, during the EDV, she used tthe adopted name CDE, what is the right thing that sppose to be in Number 14 of I-230?

Thanks for your quick response
Click to expand...

Question 14 is asking for the spouses maiden or family name. ON your form enter your wifes married name (assuming your wife used the married name on the eDV and that matches what is in her passport).

On her form Q14 will be your name and she can add her maiden name in Q2 (with Q1 having her married name).
 
Thanks for your quick response, but our forms have been sent already and processed with her maiden name entered in Q14.
Though in her own form 230, her married name was used as well as in Q31 of my own 230 form...advise please
 
britsimon said:
Question 14 is asking for the spouses maiden or family name. ON your form enter your wifes married name (assuming your wife used the married name on the eDV and that matches what is in her passport).

On her form Q14 will be your name and she can add her maiden name in Q2 (with Q1 having her married name).
Click to expand...

Our forms have been sent and processed already, but in her own 230 form her married name was used as well as in question 31 of my own 230 form....advise please
 
Agu said:
Thanks for your quick response, but our forms have been sent already and processed with her maiden name entered in Q14.
Though in her own form 230, her married name was used as well as in Q31 of my own 230 form...advise please
Click to expand...

So Agu, if you have sent the forms already it sounds like you may have made a minor mistake (or perhaps not I am not 100% clear what you have done). As long as it doesn't invalidate your eDV entry they will correct minor mistakes once you are in the interview. Since you are only asking about Q14 it sounds minor to me - and therefore not a problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top