• 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.

2018OC1678 here. Any hope?

D

DV4ROGER

Active Member
Section 203(c)(1)(E)(iv) of the Immigration and Nationality Act reads

[...] excess visa numbers shall be made available to natives [...] of the other regions in proportion to the percentages [...]

The website of the Federal Register explains that "shall" is, indeed, an obligation. For the sake of clarity, they recommend using the word "must" instead. I comply: The Visa Office must redistribute unused Asian visa numbers, and I expect them to kick off the bonanza on June 8th. The section also gives pretty clear instruction on how this has to be done. Let's see what that means for the over selected regions (EU, OC and SA).

Assumptions/Remarks
  • Africa doesn't partake, neither as recipient nor as donor. This simplifies the calculation but seems reasonable. The region's selection is about the right size.
  • North America gains less then 10 visa numbers, so I don't include it in the equation.
  • NACARA is way less than 1000. I will work with 54.500 available visa numbers globally.
How many Asian visa numbers will VO transfer?

The Asian quota of 15.716% translates into 8565 visa numbers.
At the end of the fiscal year Asia could have some 3450+250+1700 = 5400 issued visas. Taking into account the late year loss, I suggest that 5500 visa numbers might remain in Asia, and I will assume that 3150 visa numbers are up for grabs.

How many does OC get?

Since the redistribution is "in proportion to the quotas," the visa number pool of each participating region appreciates at the same rate, and we can look at the combined pool EU+SA+OC, which has a quota of 41.184% or 22,445 visa numbers.
The transferred visa numbers increase the pool and therefore the regional quotas by 3150/22445 = 14%.
In Oceania that could translate directly into an equal increase of the cutoff. The currently favored window 1450-1500 would be lifted to 1650-1710. 2018OC1678 would still be touch and go, but hope? Absolutely.

Disclaimer
The scenario is clearly optimistic. Still, I consider DV-2018 a perfect showcase for the above provision in 203(c). We've never had such an ideal opportunity to "test" the law, and some folks don't believe in it.
 
Surely if “shall” is an order, every past year for at least the last 5 or 6 would have had more visas issued already? How does last year, especially, square up with this interpretation?
 
Whilst I am looking forward to some relied for EU, SA and OC, I agree DV2018 is an interesting test. However, shall is not the same as must. Not in English, and not in law. It is ambiguous and somewhat aligned with may. It's a shame the law hasn't been amended with must - as I think that was most probably the intent.

But - the ability (or lack thereof) of the embassies to handle a sudden bonanza will impact the test - at least to some extent. OC might be able to handle a 500 VB increase in the two remaining VBs, but if they were going to do that it is odd that they didn't get closer in the 10 previous VBs (as we have seen in the past). And, there is no rule that says they must use all the visas available. They have stopped regions early before.

Lastly if you refer to June 8th as meaning the next VB - let's make clear - otherwise I get inundated with panicking people on the 9th (usually with theories of Trump running amock or aliens have landed and cancelled the VB). It might be on the 8th, but could be later - as late as the 15th.
 
Acording to translegal.com site, shall in legal terms has the same meaning as must.

shall verb
(MODAL VERB) when drafting a legal document, the term shall is used to indicate that something must be done, as opposed to the term may which simply means that something is allowed (ie that it can be done, but does not have to be done)
 
According to my old English classes, shall in its true form is indeed imperative.

However you are all assuming this current administration (1) understands the nuance and/or (2) cares. There’s no comeback to them if they don’t fulfill this as legal precedent shows even in case of uscis error, the law that no DVs can be issued after FY end still holds. And the current uscis director is totally behind the president, who has made his views on DV plain.
 
Icky said:
Acording to translegal.com site, shall in legal terms has the same meaning as must.

shall verb
(MODAL VERB) when drafting a legal document, the term shall is used to indicate that something must be done, as opposed to the term may which simply means that something is allowed (ie that it can be done, but does not have to be done)
Click to expand...

So when Cinderella is told she shall go the the ball, she had no choice? Sheesh.

Shall does not mean must - whatever the some dude on the translegal website says. Because of the ambiguity, even the he supreme court have had to rule on this.
(https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/515/417/case.html)

http://www.ncsl.org/legislators-sta...volume-xxvi-issue-2-the-false-imperative.aspx

The word shall is being taken out of legal use at a rapid pace because it causes ambiguity. Eventually even translegal.com will be changed....
 
DV4ROGER said:
Section 203(c)(1)(E)(iv) of the Immigration and Nationality Act reads

[...] excess visa numbers shall be made available to natives [...] of the other regions in proportion to the percentages [...]

The website of the Federal Register explains that "shall" is, indeed, an obligation. For the sake of clarity, they recommend using the word "must" instead. I comply: The Visa Office must redistribute unused Asian visa numbers, and I expect them to kick off the bonanza on June 8th. The section also gives pretty clear instruction on how this has to be done. Let's see what that means for the over selected regions (EU, OC and SA).

Assumptions/Remarks
  • Africa doesn't partake, neither as recipient nor as donor. This simplifies the calculation but seems reasonable. The region's selection is about the right size.
  • North America gains less then 10 visa numbers, so I don't include it in the equation.
  • NACARA is way less than 1000. I will work with 54.500 available visa numbers globally.
How many Asian visa numbers will VO transfer?

The Asian quota of 15.716% translates into 8565 visa numbers.
At the end of the fiscal year Asia could have some 3450+250+1700 = 5400 issued visas. Taking into account the late year loss, I suggest that 5500 visa numbers might remain in Asia, and I will assume that 3150 visa numbers are up for grabs.

How many does OC get?

Since the redistribution is "in proportion to the quotas," the visa number pool of each participating region appreciates at the same rate, and we can look at the combined pool EU+SA+OC, which has a quota of 41.184% or 22,445 visa numbers.
The transferred visa numbers increase the pool and therefore the regional quotas by 3150/22445 = 14%.
In Oceania that could translate directly into an equal increase of the cutoff. The currently favored window 1450-1500 would be lifted to 1650-1710. 2018OC1678 would still be touch and go, but hope? Absolutely.

Disclaimer
The scenario is clearly optimistic. Still, I consider DV-2018 a perfect showcase for the above provision in 203(c). We've never had such an ideal opportunity to "test" the law, and some folks don't believe in it.
Click to expand...
 
@DV4ROGER Did you see the VB for August interviews... No redistribution, Africa, Asia, NA current, EU only 23.325 :(

There will be no redistribution for september VB... it is unlikely... :(
 
DV4ROGER said:
Indeed, test failed!
Click to expand...
Even though redistribution is highly unlikely, it doesn't necessarily mean that the interpretation of the law is incorrect. Any legal term aimed at the executive means whatever the executive could get away with without being struck down by the judiciary. The problem is that in this case there really isn't anyone to challenge the executive since no one has a vested interest in gaining a visa via lottery. Even if the executive does interpret the "shall" as an imperative, it obviously doesn't mean "the government will go above and beyond to make sure that no selectee who might get an interview will get it". They obviously have very broad discretion in deciding WHEN other regions have exhausted themselves, or are expected to do so, and it might be that they decided on being extra cautious. That said, The reason for AS and AF being as they are this year is rather unusual--the travel ban on the one hand and embassy capacity (i.e., new AP procedures) on the other, and it isn't something they could be reliant on too much in advance. A true test case would be a year in which uneven distribution results from something more predictable, say lower density or lower response rate. There still might be some chance of redistribution next month - although the fact that they further LOWERED the interview allotment for EU seems to indicate that they aren't holding their breath in anticipation for that to become possible...
 
Actually - I see OC and SA as an encouraging sign that a redistribution did happen (or is happening). Look at OC - it increased by 200 and *IF* we see another month like that it would be 1600. *If* that were to happen - that *IS* a redistribution (because OC is very predictable).

If people were expecting fireworks, well that doesn't make much sense. EU got a "reasonable" increase - some will be surprised at how HIGH the EU number is already - and again - *IF* we were to see another month like this - EU will probably exceed the 18300.
 
DV4ROGER said:
Indeed, test failed!
Click to expand...
@Dacke
I didn't mean the redistribution theory as such has failed, it's my understanding of the decision making I consider flawed.
DanE1978 said:
There still might be some chance of redistribution next month - although the fact that they further LOWERED the interview allotment for EU seems to indicate that they aren't holding their breath in anticipation for that to become possible...
Click to expand...
Britsimon said:
Actually - I see OC and SA as an encouraging sign that a redistribution did happen (or is happening).
Click to expand...
The August numbers are well within the regions' quotas, so there hasn't been any redistribution so far. But I agree, Oceania could have been poised for a September redistribution.

Regarding Europe.
The low increase seems also in line with the quota. DV-2017 had a slightly higher quota but lower case density, saw some redistribution to the region, and had a "cutoff" at 30.7k (current). But the year also had a "second draw," and the no-response rate jumped by more than 60% for the newly selected cases. With an unchanged rate, the cutoff could well have been at 27.5k. Therefore, a cutoff below 27k for DV-2018 wouldn't be a surprise — if no redistribution happens.

What makes Europe a pain to predict is Uzbekistan. The country's erratic behavior has been keeping me wary since DV-2015. Always around 4500 selectees (unlikely to have increased in the 2nd draw), the country had 2378 visas in DV-2016 compared to 3199 in DV-2017. In both years Uzbekistan was current in Jan/Feb and there were enough visa numbers available, in DV-2016 anyway. The cleared AP cases must have made the difference. The Monthlies for DV-2017 show 499+644=1143 Uzbekistan DVs in Aug/Sep alone.
In DV-2018 again, Uzbekistan has been current since February. APs cleared by early July will go into VO's calculations and lower the September cutoff. I don't know if/how they make provisions for later clearances, but VO might mainly reuse visa numbers returning on September 1 for these cases. The 644 Uzbekistan September visas could have even VO caught off guard — and left AOS cases high and dry. Predictions for Europe are bound to be hit or miss, unless you can estimate how many Uzbekistan AP cases clear early enough to influence the July decision. The "lowered interview allotment" can be a (bad) sign that there are such cases in play.
At any rate, the current visa demand suggests that raising the cutoff by 1000 points will generate 500-550 additional non-U2 CP visas. The highish number of Ukrainian visas issued so far isn't helpful either. Still, I think the European quota should be able to sustain a September cutoff of at least 25.5k, and if the redistribution theory holds any water, the cutoff should be considerably higher.

We saw redistributions in the past, and while I don't quite understand why VO would wait until July to make the decision (waiting for Supreme Court, or simply standard procedure?), I'm still optimistic that it will happen, my original premise that VO feed *all* visa numbers into the regions (generating a bonanza) now looks rather daring though. But I'm not yet ready to let go of it.
Incidentally, AF is current! That was to be expected, sure, but I didn't think it would happen already in August. Does the region have some spare visa numbers? (@VisaOffice)
 
Hello @DV4ROGER,
Thanks for guide and analysis. My calculation says that KCC will give about 45K visa in the end of fiscal year and about 5K visas will remain if no redistribution happens. This is overselected years and it does not like previous years. So, do you think , if about 4-5K visas will remain, KCC make unusual decisions to complete 50K visas or next visa bulletin can we see extreme jump to see 33-34K cutoff ?

Thanks again,
Erdem
 
DV4ROGER said:
@Dacke
I didn't mean the redistribution theory as such has failed, it's my understanding of the decision making I consider flawed.


The August numbers are well within the regions' quotas, so there hasn't been any redistribution so far. But I agree, Oceania could have been poised for a September redistribution.

Regarding Europe.
The low increase seems also in line with the quota. DV-2017 had a slightly higher quota but lower case density, saw some redistribution to the region, and had a "cutoff" at 30.7k (current). But the year also had a "second draw," and the no-response rate jumped by more than 60% for the newly selected cases. With an unchanged rate, the cutoff could well have been at 27.5k. Therefore, a cutoff below 27k for DV-2018 wouldn't be a surprise — if no redistribution happens.

What makes Europe a pain to predict is Uzbekistan. The country's erratic behavior has been keeping me wary since DV-2015. Always around 4500 selectees (unlikely to have increased in the 2nd draw), the country had 2378 visas in DV-2016 compared to 3199 in DV-2017. In both years Uzbekistan was current in Jan/Feb and there were enough visa numbers available, in DV-2016 anyway. The cleared AP cases must have made the difference. The Monthlies for DV-2017 show 499+644=1143 Uzbekistan DVs in Aug/Sep alone.
In DV-2018 again, Uzbekistan has been current since February. APs cleared by early July will go into VO's calculations and lower the September cutoff. I don't know if/how they make provisions for later clearances, but VO might mainly reuse visa numbers returning on September 1 for these cases. The 644 Uzbekistan September visas could have even VO caught off guard — and left AOS cases high and dry. Predictions for Europe are bound to be hit or miss, unless you can estimate how many Uzbekistan AP cases clear early enough to influence the July decision. The "lowered interview allotment" can be a (bad) sign that there are such cases in play.
At any rate, the current visa demand suggests that raising the cutoff by 1000 points will generate 500-550 additional non-U2 CP visas. The highish number of Ukrainian visas issued so far isn't helpful either. Still, I think the European quota should be able to sustain a September cutoff of at least 25.5k, and if the redistribution theory holds any water, the cutoff should be considerably higher.

We saw redistributions in the past, and while I don't quite understand why VO would wait until July to make the decision (waiting for Supreme Court, or simply standard procedure?), I'm still optimistic that it will happen, my original premise that VO feed *all* visa numbers into the regions (generating a bonanza) now looks rather daring though. But I'm not yet ready to let go of it.
Incidentally, AF is current! That was to be expected, sure, but I didn't think it would happen already in August. Does the region have some spare visa numbers? (@VisaOffice)
Click to expand...

AF will probably have spare visas. I am very concerned why some embassies are not scheduling interviews. Certain embassies have not scheduled (or rather allowed KCC to schedule) anyone from cases current in June and July - let alone the new cases made current in this VB. So - all of that is going to happen in August/September - scary. This is a new phenomenon.

I agree Uzbekistan creates challenges/confusion. Their entries increased massively in DV2018 - and whilst they generally get the same selectee count as Ukraine - they typically get higher issued numbers. Normal numbers would suggest they still have about 1000 visas to be issued - just for Uzbekistan - and that will be a big dent in the remaining visas.
 
Britsimon said:
AF will probably have spare visas. I am very concerned why some embassies are not scheduling interviews. Certain embassies have not scheduled (or rather allowed KCC to schedule) anyone from cases current in June and July - let alone the new cases made current in this VB. So - all of that is going to happen in August/September - scary. This is a new phenomenon.

.
Click to expand...

One person from my home country has not received a 2NL for July. (There is no issue at all with workload at that consulate and DS was submitted last year.) But we have so few selectees and so few of those that proceed and end up on forums that it’s hard to know if it’s more widespread.
 
erdem said:
Hello @DV4ROGER,
[C]an we see extreme jump to see 33-34K cutoff ?
Click to expand...
That depends on DoS' policy regarding redistribution. I can imagine three scenarios.

Option A
Redistribution is an obligation, no 50k cap, the decision is made before July 8 and will have an impact on the September cutoff.

Option B
Redistribution is an obligation with an enforced 50k cap under NACARA pretense, the decision is made before July 8 and will have an impact on the September cutoff.

Option C
The decision is made after July 15 and has no impact on the September cutoff. Redistribution is used to accommodate AOS and cleared APs in August and September.

Sadly, option C suits the redistributions we saw in the past. In this case, the EU cutoff could be somewhere between 25.5k and 28.5k, depending on how many cleared U2 APs do claim visa numbers on July 8 — hopefully none.

Options A/B both lead to higher cutoffs. But for a case like EU34000, it would need more than just the unused Asian numbers to become current. Africa's CEAC data shows a ridiculously low count of visa numbers assigned to cases 28000-38000, less than 1000. If this were a true representation of the African demand, there would be several thousand unused visa numbers in the region, and under option A/B the cutoff would easily reach EU34000 (if they use all numbers).
After the August numbers, I still root for options A/B, but I find it difficult to truly believe in it. A deluge in September would be logistically possible, but we have never seen or heard of anything alike. The only upside of the DV-2018 disaster is purely academic. The redistribution question will have been settled by July 15.

I cling my hope to OC's 1400 as a sign of something good to come. Sorry, I can't really answer your question.
 
Dear @DV4ROGER ,
Thank you for your kindly and detailed response. It means alot. We have to wait for it to happen.
My guess is KCC can not see the holes with this data yet due to ready & ap clutter. They analysis the visa bulletin with maximum risk of ready and ap cases, in my opinion.
Africa region is not better than last year when looked at visa conversion rate& refusals & no show up. My guess is Africa will end at 19-20K. And some visas will remain to redistribute. The question is KCC has time to see this distribution or not.

Thanks for your guides, support and optimistic approach.

Erdem
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top