Latest Retrogression Update from ILW.com

T

the

Registered Users (C)
Latest On Retrogression

Our 9/23/05 comment on retrogression suggesting that there were significant numbers available has led to a deluge of letters to the Editor and discussion. We had suggested that there would be a total of 248,000 visas for FY 2006 comprised of 140,000 (regular quota) + 8,000 (overflow from family) + 101,000 (AC 21 recaptures). Immigration Daily has now learned from USCIS Nebraska Service Center Deputy Director Christian who inquired of Charlie Oppenheim at the Department of State as follows:

"I believed the information in [the comment] to be incorrect and inquired of Charlie Oppenheim at Department of State. His response was as follows: "AC21 had recaptured the FY-1999/FY-2000 unused Employment numbers which totaled approximately 131,000. Approximately 101,000 of those numbers remained available for use in FY-2005, and there will be about 8,000 remaining for use in FY-2006. My estimate for the FY-2006 Employment limit will be 156,000 (140,000 + 8,000 (FY-2005 Family) + 8,000 (AC21)."
Thus, the total number of FY 2006 EB visas is 156,000, not 248,000. The information we supplied earlier was the best estimate available at the time. With the revised numbers from the DOS above for which we thank Mr. Christian and Mr. Oppenheim, the EB situation appears to be bleaker than even we had feared. As indicated earlier, it is possible that there may be some disputes about the count which may or may not be litigated.
As this fluid situation develops, we will be happy to address queries which clearly originate from immigration professionals. Immigrants and employers should contact their immigration attorney for the latest information.

http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/#comment
 
Doesn't make sense

So... is DoS into disinformation now? Look at the Sep 05 bulletin section F....

(http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2616.html)

==============
The Department of State has determined the family and employment preference numerical limits for FY-2005 in accordance with the terms of Section 201 of the INA. These numerical limitations for FY-2005 are as follows:

Worldwide Family-Sponsored preference limit: 226,000
Worldwide Employment-Based preference limit: 148,449

Under INA Section 202(A), the per-country limit is fixed at 7% of the family and employment annual limits. For FY-2005 the per-country limit is 26,211. The dependent area annual limit is 2%, or 7,489.
==============


the said:
Latest On Retrogression

Our 9/23/05 comment on retrogression suggesting that there were significant numbers available has led to a deluge of letters to the Editor and discussion. We had suggested that there would be a total of 248,000 visas for FY 2006 comprised of 140,000 (regular quota) + 8,000 (overflow from family) + 101,000 (AC 21 recaptures). Immigration Daily has now learned from USCIS Nebraska Service Center Deputy Director Christian who inquired of Charlie Oppenheim at the Department of State as follows:

"I believed the information in [the comment] to be incorrect and inquired of Charlie Oppenheim at Department of State. His response was as follows: "AC21 had recaptured the FY-1999/FY-2000 unused Employment numbers which totaled approximately 131,000. Approximately 101,000 of those numbers remained available for use in FY-2005, and there will be about 8,000 remaining for use in FY-2006. My estimate for the FY-2006 Employment limit will be 156,000 (140,000 + 8,000 (FY-2005 Family) + 8,000 (AC21)."
Thus, the total number of FY 2006 EB visas is 156,000, not 248,000. The information we supplied earlier was the best estimate available at the time. With the revised numbers from the DOS above for which we thank Mr. Christian and Mr. Oppenheim, the EB situation appears to be bleaker than even we had feared. As indicated earlier, it is possible that there may be some disputes about the count which may or may not be litigated.
As this fluid situation develops, we will be happy to address queries which clearly originate from immigration professionals. Immigrants and employers should contact their immigration attorney for the latest information.

http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/#comment
Click to expand...
 
Immigrant visa numbers

This is not so good news.
Lets pray that the congress steps in and increases the immigrant visa numbers for all categories.
 
Do we know if the Congress or any immigration committee is working towards developing a remedy/solution to this problem ?


If we had knew about this before starting the GC process I would have spent my previous six years at home in India in the presence of my family and friends.
 
The most popular bill that could increase the EB visa numbers is the McCain/Kennedy bill S.1033. Believe me, I have a certain connections with Senators in my area and people tells me this bill is unlikely to pass.

All information I hear is that the Cornyn/Kyl bill is a more reasonable one. That one should increase the EB numbers, but not as many as the McCain Kennedy one.

Tom Tancredo's recent bill actually is trying to decrease the Visa numbes to 5,200/year. Mind you.



retro_unjust said:
Do we know if the Congress or any immigration committee is working towards developing a remedy/solution to this problem ?


If we had knew about this before starting the GC process I would have spent my previous six years at home in India in the presence of my family and friends.
Click to expand...
 
Opposite of what I've heard

What are you basing this on... I have heard the exact opposite. S1033 has W's support, not to mention McCain, Kennedy, Lieberman.
Now it might not come up at all with Katrina and what not.... but that's another matter.

marlon2006 said:
....Believe me, I have a certain connections with Senators in my area and people tells me this bill is unlikely to pass.

All information I hear is that the Cornyn/Kyl bill is a more reasonable one. .....
Click to expand...
 
Do we know when the Mc Cain Kennedy Bill comes up for hearing/debate and how long the outcome may take ? Thanks to Senator Mc Cain and Kennedy for this initiative.




infostarved said:
What are you basing this on... I have heard the exact opposite. S1033 has W's support, not to mention McCain, Kennedy, Lieberman.
Now it might not come up at all with Katrina and what not.... but that's another matter.
Click to expand...
 
If its already proposed and on the table , there must be an expected date for the hearing right ?


retro_unjust said:
Do we know when the Mc Cain Kennedy Bill comes up for hearing/debate and how long the outcome may take ? Thanks to Senator Mc Cain and Kennedy for this initiative.
Click to expand...
 
Well what we are looking at is an overall improvement in the process that reduces this severe backlog. By the way I am an EB3 so hail Cornyn Kyl !


LCSilence said:
Cornyn-Kyl bill actually decreases EB2 quotas in favor of EB3. Definitely don't support that bill.
Click to expand...
 
Cornyn/Kyl

Infostarved, here is the quote, from ilw.com. I read other reports from other sites, I can't exactly remember where they are, but if I understand correctly the President has said things that are more coherent with the Cornyn/Kyl bill guidelines. My connections tell me anti-illegals and pro immigration groups will fight hard to defeat the McCain one. The same group is more receptive of the Cornyn/Kyl bill. Things have changed for the worse when it comes to immigration. I wish good luck to all supporting the McCain bill, but I doubt it will pass. Just my humble opinion though.

from ilw.com

Comment
Immigration Reform Ahoy

The first signs of major immigration reform becomng law were found behind closed doors at a recent White House meeting attended mostly by House Republicans. The meeting was held to address the viability of the Republican party whose efforts to reach Hispanics are being thwarted by a minority of anti-immigration Republicans. During the meeting, Mr. Karl Rove unveiled a comprehensive presentation of the Administration's immigration reform plans, a departure from the usual hands-off White House approach. Details of the proposed immigration reform echoed legislation proposed by the Cornyn-Kyl bill: increased enforcement (both along the border and against employers), guest worker eligibility for the undocumented for a maximum of 6 years with a 1-year minimum return to the home country, and no path to citizenship. This meeting is the first sign that a large battle centered on immigration is brewing and when Congress returns this fall, expect major bills to be voted on in both the House and Senate tackling immigration reform. Stay tuned.


infostarved said:
What are you basing this on... I have heard the exact opposite. S1033 has W's support, not to mention McCain, Kennedy, Lieberman.
Now it might not come up at all with Katrina and what not.... but that's another matter.
Click to expand...
 
I meant "pro immigration reduction" groups...

marlon2006 said:
Infostarved, here is the quote, from ilw.com. I read other reports from other sites, I can't exactly remember where they are, but if I understand correctly the President has said things that are more coherent with the Cornyn/Kyl bill guidelines. My connections tell me anti-illegals and pro immigration groups will fight hard to defeat the McCain one. The same group is more receptive of the Cornyn/Kyl bill. Things have changed for the worse when it comes to immigration. I wish good luck to all supporting the McCain bill, but I doubt it will pass. Just my humble opinion though.

from ilw.com

Comment
Immigration Reform Ahoy

The first signs of major immigration reform becomng law were found behind closed doors at a recent White House meeting attended mostly by House Republicans. The meeting was held to address the viability of the Republican party whose efforts to reach Hispanics are being thwarted by a minority of anti-immigration Republicans. During the meeting, Mr. Karl Rove unveiled a comprehensive presentation of the Administration's immigration reform plans, a departure from the usual hands-off White House approach. Details of the proposed immigration reform echoed legislation proposed by the Cornyn-Kyl bill: increased enforcement (both along the border and against employers), guest worker eligibility for the undocumented for a maximum of 6 years with a 1-year minimum return to the home country, and no path to citizenship. This meeting is the first sign that a large battle centered on immigration is brewing and when Congress returns this fall, expect major bills to be voted on in both the House and Senate tackling immigration reform. Stay tuned.
Click to expand...
 
By the way even McCain-Kennedy seeks to reduce EB1 and EB2 to 20% each (although it's less radical than the Cornyn-Kyl 10%). Also, I read both bills and as far as I can see both bills seek to abrogate 8USC 1152(a)(5)(A), the section in the INA that lifts per-country limits on a per-EB-category basis. Both bills aim to increase per country limits to 10% from the current 7% and both bills allow for unused numbers to flow from year to year. Cornyn-Kyl additionally does away with the diversity program (I'll drink to the cancellation of that braindead program any day) and gives it to EB people.

Also, the wording of the section about backlog reduction and per country limits is strikingly similar between the two bills.... almost as if the same person wrote it up... so I wont be surprised if this is a toss up or some compromise between the two... they're more concerned about giving illegals GCs or not and W vs H5A visa. Backlog reduction is a distant second on their radar screen.


retro_unjust said:
Well what we are looking at is an overall improvement in the process that reduces this severe backlog. By the way I am an EB3 so hail Cornyn Kyl !
Click to expand...
 
InfoStarved, where did you get information that Cornyn-Kyl cut EB1 and 2 quota to 10%? I thought it was 20%.

Anybody has any idea when these two bills will be discussed?

Thanks,
 
Last edited by a moderator:
How uscis is going to process and approve pending retrogressed 485s?

Sofar, USCIS was processing 485s based on the receipt date, rather than PD. In future, how uscis is going to process and approve pending retrogressed 485s? Is it practically possible for them to rearrange pending 485s in PD order, and approve sequencely?

I feel that the main reason for cutoff date is to clear the massively pending unadjudicated 485s, till then USCIS do not want to accept anymore new 485s. USCIS annual report explained clearly that, as DOS gauging visas based on rate of 485 approvals, not by the pending 485s. It is not right. Therefore (because of wrong metering), so many persons filed 485s, though enough visa numbers were not available and enjoying interim benefits (EAD, AP, SSN). Per USCIS report 2005, its goal is to stop/minimize the interim benefits. Stopping the new 485s will help the USCIS in concentrating in clearing the backlogs. That is why, DOS/CIS has setup the cutoff dates very far back (1998/1999), though there may not be much pending LC/140/485s with PD with the year 1998/1999. I feel that USCIS may approve some old cases eb2/3 (may be PD 2000) between Oct1 to Oct 31. Will it be right
 
...

USCIS will take HUGE REVENUE losses by not accepting any I-485 from Oct1. USCIS is predominantly funded by fees. If you read the Ombudsman report (Prakash Khatri) posted on this website by someone, the loss in USCIS revenues could be crippling, although the requests for EAD/AP renewal for the pending cases could keep it going for sometime.
 
Guys, When you consider the visa number usage,
Also keep in mind that Scedule A workers is current.

Although the Visa Bullettin Says "up to 50,000" visas,
I have heard that they use up the regular numbers first.

So what will end up happening is, even the existing
eb3 regular visas can be drained by Schedule A workers
even as other eb3 workers get 'NOTHING' because of
cut-off date being pegged at Jan 1998.

Now, correct me if I am wrong; 2006 eb3 numbers
will be used up by Schedule A and after those are over
they can eat into their own 50K visa allotment.

Initially I thought the schedule A is only till Sept 30
(end of FY 2005) Now it appears that DOS forgot about that part
of the law that created it!

I think Schedule A category and Labor substitutions is what will do havoc to
eb3 GC aspirants. It s not the existing pending cases.
And I beleive this is UNFAIR
true GC not a right
But Atleast why cant they have a temp visa program and subsequent
GC just like techies.

Bottom Line: Other EB3 categories, forget about GC approvals
for a couple of years and sit tight

What a miserable situation for guys here in the US for 8 to 10+
years and wasting their prime life anxious about the
"idiocracy" (I dont know if this word exists) of this system
 
Number Game... No logic

As per latest ILW information, there were 248,000(140K reg + 7000 FB extra + 101K AC21) EB visas were available for FY 2005 (Oct 2004 to Sep 2005). Now they are saying that, out of 248,000 visas only 240,000 were used in FY 2005, remaining 8000 was carried over to FY 2006. OK. That means, in FY 2005 there were extra visas available. Then, why DOS said no visas were available for any one in EB3 category between July 2005 to Sep 2005? Why they have not used 8000 visas in EB3 category in FY2005 itself, instead carrying it over to FY 2006? There is no logic in saying that 8000 visas were not used at the same time visas unavailable in the same year (also note that EB1, 2 Schedule A were current throughout FY2005).
 
to eppo varum GC

Hi,
I thought your user name was interesting.
Don't worry, Seekiram varum GC if MC cain-Kennedy bill passes.
jay
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top